    [Senate Hearing 119-324]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                           S. Hrg. 119-324

                      TO CONSIDER THE NOMINATIONS OF: MR.
                       MICHAEL P. CADENAZZI, JR. TO BE ASSISTANT
                       SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR INDUSTRIAL
                       BASE POLICY; AND VICE ADMIRAL SCOTT
                       W. PAPPANO, USN TO BE PRINCIPAL DEPUTY
                       ADMINISTRATOR NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECU-
                       RITY ADMINISTRATION
    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                 APRIL 29, 2025

                                   __________

             Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                     Available via: http://www.govinfo.gov

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

     ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi, Chairman

     DEB FISCHER, Nebraska			JACK REED, Rhode Island
     TOM COTTON, Arkansas			JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire
     MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota		KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York
     JONI ERNST, Iowa			RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
     DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska			MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
     KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota		TIM KAINE, Virginia
     RICK SCOTT, Florida			ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine
     TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama		ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts
     MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma	        GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
     TED BUDD, North Carolina		TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
     ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri			JACKY ROSEN, Nevada
     JIM BANKS, INDIANA			MARK KELLY, Arizona
     TIM SHEEHY, MONTANA                  	ELISSA SLOTKIN, MICHIGAN

     		   John P. Keast, Staff Director
     		Elizabeth L. King, Minority Staff Director

                                      (ii)

                               C O N T E N T S

    _________________________________________________________________

                                 april 29, 2025

                                                                       Page
    To Consider the Nominations of: Mr. Michael P. Cadenazzi, Jr. to      1
      be Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy;
      and Vice Admiral Scott W. Pappano, USN to be Principal Deputy
      Administrator National Nuclear Security Administration.

                               Members Statements

    Wicker, Senator Roger F..........................................     1

    Reed, Senator Jack...............................................     2

                               Witness Statements

    Mr. Michael P. Cadenazzi, Jr., Nominated to be Assistant              3
      Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy.

      Advance Policy Questions.......................................    33

      Questions for the Record.......................................    49

      Nomination Reference and Report................................    66

      Biographical Sketch............................................    67

      Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire......................    69

      Signature Page.................................................    75

    Pappano, Vice Admiral Scott W., USN, Nominated to be Principal       75
      Deputy Administrator National Nuclear Security Administration.

      Advance Policy Questions.......................................    75

      Questions for the Record.......................................    94

      Nomination Reference and Report................................   104

      Biographical Sketch............................................   105

      Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire......................   106

      Signature Page.................................................   111

                                     (iii)

      TO CONSIDER THE NOMINATIONS OF: MR. MICHAEL P. CADENAZZI, JR. TO BE
      ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR INDUSTRIAL BASE POLICY; AND VICE
      ADMIRAL SCOTT W. PAPPANO, USN TO BE PRINCIPAL DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR
                    NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

                                  ----------

                            TUESDAY, APRIL 29, 2025

                                  United States Senate,
                                   Committee on Armed Services,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:31 a.m. in room
    SD-G50, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Senator Roger Wicker
    (Chairman of the Committee) presiding.
        Committee Members present: Senators Wicker, Fischer,
    Rounds, Ernst, Sullivan, Scott, Budd, Sheehy, Reed, Shaheen,
    Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Rosen, and
    Kelly.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR ROGER F. WICKER

        Chairman Wicker. Good morning. This hearing will come to
    order. I welcome our witnesses and their families and I thank
    them for being here this morning.
        The United States is up against the most dangerous threat
    environment we've faced since World War II. I say it
    frequently, but it needs to be said even more frequently. I'm
    grateful that these two individuals have stepped up to help us
    in these challenging times.
        Mr. Scott Pappano has been nominated to be Principal Deputy
    Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration
    (NNSA). In this position, Mr. Pappano will help lead an
    organization tasked with rebuilding and modernizing our long,
    neglected nuclear weapons stock pile. He must be up to the task
    because our nuclear dangers are more complex than ever.
        Over the past several years, we've watched as Russia,
    China, and North Korea have rapidly expanded their nuclear
    arsenals and developed new types of weapons, weapons for which
    we are not prepared. In his previous position, Mr. Pappano saw
    firsthand that the U.S. is far behind in ship building. I hope
    he'll bring important lessons from that experience and apply
    them to this role. Modernizing our nuclear deterrent is a
    national imperative, and this Committee expects to see results.
    I look forward to hearing how Mr. Pappano intends to drive NNSA
    to achieve this objective.
        Mr. Michael Cadenazzi has been nominated to be the
    Assistant Secretary of Defense for industrial based policy at
    the Department of Defense (DOD). Mr. Cadenazzi served 10 years
    in the U.S. Navy as a cryptologic officer, and then took his
    talents to private industry. He spent 20 years addressing
    strategic and operational defense and aerospace challenges. He
    has launched or participated in startups working on analytics,
    technical service, and artificial intelligence (AI).
        He has been nominated to a position that is relatively new,
    but it must not be overlooked. As a matter of fact, it should
    be given very serious attention. The Office of Industrial Base
    Policy is one of the most important posts in the Pentagon. We
    need a large and capable cohort of defense industrial policy
    analysts who can bring serious options to the Secretary of
    Defense and the Congress, and we need those analysts to be
    guided by a capable leader.
        I look forward to hearing Mr. Cadenazzi's opinions on how
    we can improve and simplify the department's analytic capacity
    and investment authorities to build a more resilient industrial
    base. I look forward to their testimony.
        I now turn to my dear friend and Ranking Member, Senator
    Reed.

                     STATEMENT OF SENATOR JACK REED

        Senator Reed. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let
    me welcome Mr. Cadenazzi and Admiral Pappano. Thank you,
    gentlemen. Welcome. Congratulations on your nomination.
        Also, this is a special moment because we have a reunion of
    Rogers High School in Newport, Rhode Island here, and I want to
    recognize all the Rhode Islanders.
        Chairman Wicker. We're pressed for time.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Reed. I know. Well, I can name them one by one if
    you'd like, but all right, I will move on.
        Mr. Cadenazzi, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
    Industrial Base Policy serves as a principal advisor to the
    Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, for
    all industrial base policies and related matters. The position
    has a wide scope of responsibilities from ensuring supply chain
    security, to guiding Department-wide investments into critical
    defense technology sectors, to coordinating small business
    programs.
        If you are confirmed, you'll be the second person to hold
    this office. As such, there are a number of important
    challenges you will need to address. In particular, the Defense
    Department needs a coordinated strategy for working with the
    defense industry to expand production capacity of weapon
    systems, munitions, and key technologies such as
    microelectronics, hyper sonics, and biomanufacturing. These
    technologies will be crucial for maintaining America's global
    competitiveness and will require working with industry across
    the broad from prime contractors to sub-tier suppliers and
    producers of raw materials. I would ask for your plans for
    addressing this significant challenge as we go forward.
        Further, as we've seen with greater clarity over the past
    several years, ensuring supply chain security and access to
    strategic minerals such as rare earth elements is critical for
    the Department and the defense industrial base. The Defense
    Department must take a proactive approach to identifying
    threats and vulnerabilities for its supply chains and develop
    plans and tools to mitigate those risks.
        I would note that doing so will require the Department to
    work across the inter-agency with multiple other Federal
    agencies. I would like to know your thoughts on how you would
    address this challenge. Mr. Cadenazzi, if confirmed, your
    experience as a Navy officer and as a business leader in a
    high-tech field will be valuable for meeting these challenges.
        However, I would indicate too that you'll have to pick up
    and grow your knowledge very rapidly because these fields are
    changing so rapidly. You have a challenging task and I wish you
    well.
        Admiral Pappano, you have been nominated to be Deputy
    Administrator for the National Nuclear Security Administrator
    or NNSA. You retired last month as the Vice Admiral after a 36-
    year career in the Navy. Thank you for your service, sir. You
    were a principal leader and military deputy to the Assistant
    Secretary of the Navy for Research. So, you come well equipped
    to this task.
        If confirmed, you'll lead the day-to-day operations of the
    NNSA. Most importantly, you'll lead efforts to modernize the
    warheads and our nuclear triad of submarines, heavy bombers,
    and intercontinental ballistic missiles. The NNSA has been
    working for years to complete this modernization, but the
    Department is experiencing tremendous workload as it
    simultaneously recapitalizes warhead programs and undertakes
    the major rebuilding of its nuclear infrastructure, much of
    which dates back to the Manhattan Project.
        I would note that the NNSA's workforce is specialized
    nuclear scientists and engineers is fundamental to
    accomplishing these missions. I'm concerned that morale in the
    Department has been badly harmed in recent months as hundreds
    of employees have been fired or threatened with firing. Mr.
    Pappano, as a career Navy officer, I would like to know how you
    will approach these challenges, including how you'll work to
    retain the skilled civil servants to maintain our nuclear
    deterrent.
        Thank you again to our nominees and I look forward to your
    testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you, Senator Reed, and I too am
    delighted that the State of Rhode Island is so well
    represented----
        Senator Reed. Thank you.
        Chairman Wicker.--by individuals. At this point we will
    recognize our guests for their opening statements. Mr.
    Cadenazzi, you are recognized for your opening statements, sir.

      STATEMENT OF MR. MICHAEL P. CADENAZZI, JR., NOMINATED TO BE
       ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR INDUSTRIAL BASE POLICY

        Mr. Cadenazzi. Thank you, Senator. Chairman Wicker, Ranking
    Member Reed, Members of the Senate Armed Services Committee,
    thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I
    would like to thank President Trump, the Administration,
    Secretary Hegseth, and his team, for their support of my
    nomination to serve as the next Assistant Secretary of Defense
    for Industrial Base Policy.
        I must also thank and acknowledge my family. My father,
    retired Navy Commander Michael Sr., my mother Joanne, and my
    sister Marisa. My three daughters, Mhairi, Hannah, and Iona.
    Their energy and laughter give my life color and their
    successes fill me with immeasurable pride. I want to thank my
    wife, Sarah. I would not be anywhere, much less here, without
    her.
        My entire adult life has been spent in the defense sector
    and in support of the effort to address the critical needs of
    our industrial base. From my oath to the Nation as a Tulane
    NROTC midshipman in August 1991, through 10 years of Active
    Duty service as a naval cryptologic officer, I had the
    privilege to serve with dedicated military professionals of
    every rank and branch. Over the past 2 decades, I have been
    fortunate enough to work with the defense industrial base from
    the primes down into the supply chain while tackling myriad
    business issues.
        At this critical time, I see the scale of challenges facing
    our military while competing with a near peer pacing us in many
    ways. In my view, the U.S. Defense Industrial Base, we face
    constraints in crucial and exquisite capabilities delivered in
    uncomfortably limited quantities over long timelines,
    experiencing delivery delays, and increasing costs. There are
    simply not enough weapons or platforms and our readiness is
    inadequate. These are national level challenges that undermine
    our lethality and security.
        Senators, I want this role because I want America to win. I
    want to contribute to America's future victories, and I want to
    take part in overcoming these challenges and forging a more
    resilient, innovative, and responsive version of the industrial
    machine that has underpinned our natural security since World
    War II.
        This role is critical to Secretary Hegseth's commitment to
    rebuild the military by revitalizing the defense industrial
    base. If confirmed, I will execute the role with three guiding
    principles: prioritization, productivity, and production.
        First, prioritization. We must focus on the urgent needs of
    war fighters today while positioning for the challenges of
    tomorrow. There are immediate problems in lethality, lower tier
    supply chain, and readiness. There is the need for long-term
    transformation flowing from increased private capital,
    invigorated domestic manufacturing, and secure access to vital
    materials and minerals.
        There is an abundance of analysis on our industrial
    problems and thankfully, an equally abundant set of proposed
    solutions, all of which outstrip our cash and capabilities to
    respond. Hard choices await us as a department and as a Nation.
        Second, productivity. This office must be a catalyst to
    increase industrial productivity at every level. If confirmed,
    I will collaborate across government and industry to target
    critical investment into the most pressing supply chain gaps
    and bottlenecks. I believe we must accelerate adoption of
    today's digital tools to secure the leap ahead benefits of AI
    and quantum for the future. Our goal must be to maximize the
    productive impact of every defense dollar.
        Third, production. The DOD must accelerate and scale
    industrial base production now in advance of major conflict,
    and we must position industry to surge in fulfillment of future
    demands. Progress against these objectives will make a
    measurable difference in our national security.
        In closing, I want to acknowledge the outpouring of support
    and my pursuit of this effort. It has been truly humbling. What
    has been equally gratifying is the unabashed commitment of
    individuals across government and industry to work together to
    make the industrial base better. We have done this work before
    and now we must do it again.
        Senators, I respectfully request your support for my
    confirmation and for the vital tasks that lie ahead to reawaken
    the innovative spirit of the American industrial base and to
    ensure that our Nation remains a force for peace and stability
    through strength. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Michael P. Cadenazzi, Jr.
    follows:]

              Prepared Statement by Mr. Michael P. Cadenazzi, Jr.
        I would like to thank President Trump, the Administration,
    Secretary Hegseth and his team for their support of my nomination to
    serve as the next Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base
    Policy.
        I must also thank and acknowledge my family.
        My father, retired Navy Commander Michael Sr, my mother Joanne, and
    my sister Marisa.
        My three daughters, Mhairi, Hannah and Iona. Their energy and
    laughter give my life color. Their successes fill me with immeasurable
    pride.
        And I want to thank my wife, Sarah. I would not be anywhere, much
    less here, without her.
        My entire adult life has been spent in the defense sector and in
    support of the effort to address the critical needs of our industrial
    base. From my oath to the Nation as a Tulane NROTC midshipman in August
    1991 through 10 years of Active Duty service as a Naval Cryptologic
    officer, I had the privilege of serving with dedicated military
    professionals of every rank and branch. And over the past two decades I
    have been fortunate enough to work with the defense industrial base
    from the primes down into the supply chain while tackling myriad
    business issues.
        At this critical time, I see the scale of challenges facing our
    military while competing with a near peer pacing us in many ways. In my
    view of the U.S. Defense Industrial Base, we face constraints in
    crucial and exquisite capabilities, delivered in uncomfortably limited
    quantities over long timelines, while experiencing delivery delays and
    increasing costs. There are simply not enough weapons or platforms. And
    our readiness is inadequate.
        These are national level challenges that undermine our lethality
    and security.
        Senators, I want this role because I want America to win. I want to
    contribute to America's future victories. And I want to take part in
    overcoming these challenges and forging a more resilient, innovative,
    and responsive version of the industrial machine that has underpinned
    our national security since World War II.
        This role is critical to Secretary Hegseth's commitment to
    ``Rebuild the Military'' by ``Revitalizing the defense industrial
    base''.
        If confirmed, I will execute the role with three guiding
    principles:
        Prioritization. Productivity. And Production.
        First, Prioritization: We must focus on the urgent needs of
    warfighters today, while positioning for the challenges of tomorrow.
    There are immediate problems in lethality, lower tier supply chains &
    readiness. And there is the need for long-term transformation flowing
    from increased private capital, invigorated domestic manufacturing, and
    secure access to vital materials and minerals.
        There is an abundance of analysis on our industrial problems. And,
    thankfully, an equally abundant set of proposed solutions. All of which
    outstrip our cash and capabilities to respond. Hard choices await us as
    a Department and a Nation.
        Second, Productivity: This office must be a catalyst to increase
    industrial productivity at every level. If confirmed, I will
    collaborate across government and industry to target critical
    investment into the most pressing supply chain gaps and bottlenecks.
    And I believe we must accelerate adoption of today's digital tools to
    secure the leap-ahead benefits of AI and quantum. Our goal must be to
    maximize the productive impact of every defense dollar.
        Third, Production: The DOD must accelerate and scale industrial
    base production now in advance of conflict. And we must position
    industry to surge in fulfillment of future demands. Progress against
    these objectives will make a measurable difference in our national
    security.
        In closing, I want to acknowledge the outpouring of support in my
    pursuit of this role--it has been humbling. What has been equally
    gratifying is the unabashed commitment of individuals across government
    and industry committed to ``work together to make the industrial base
    better.'' We have done this work before, and now we must do it again.
        Senators, I respectfully request your support for my confirmation
    and for the vital tasks that lie ahead: to reawaken the innovative
    spirit of the American Industrial Base and to ensure that our Nation
    remains a force for peace and stability through strength.

        Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much, Mr. Cadenazzi. Vice
    Admiral Pappano.

     STATEMENT OF VICE ADMIRAL SCOTT W. PAPPANO, USN, NOMINATED TO
      BE PRINCIPAL DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY
                             ADMINISTRATION

        Vice Admiral Pappano. Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed,
    and Members of the Committee, thank you for your consideration
    of my nomination to be the Principal Deputy Administrator of
    the National Nuclear Security Administration, NNSA at the U.S.
    Department of Energy.
        Since first taking the oath of office in July, 1985, I have
    devoted my entire adult life to serving our Nation as
    commissioned officer in the Navy. I thank President Trump and
    Energy Secretary Wright for affording me the opportunity to
    shift course and continue my public service in a greater and
    more impactful capacity.
        I also need to thank my wife of 34 years, Kate, for joining
    me here today and for her service to the Nation as the
    commander-in-chief of the Pappano household. Nothing I have
    achieved would've been possible without her love and support,
    and her commitment to raising our children throughout my
    frequent absences is a testament to her strength and
    resilience. We are both proud of the adults our children have
    grown up to be.
        Foundational qualifications to serve as the principal
    deputy administrator of NNSA, include an extensive background
    in organizational management and being well qualified to manage
    nuclear weapons, infrastructure, construction and maintenance,
    non-proliferation, material disposition programs, in a manner
    to enhance and protect U.S. national security through the
    military application of nuclear energy.
        I believe that, if confirmed, my background, experience,
    and expertise would be well suited to execute the duties of
    this office. I also believe deeply in the mission. Strategic
    nuclear deterrence is fundamental to our national security and
    modernizing our Nation's nuclear weapons stockpile, nuclear
    forces, and supporting infrastructure is a critical national
    security priority.
        My qualifications are founded upon the bedrock of a strong
    technical education, with an undergraduate degree in marine
    engineering from the U.S. Naval Academy, and a graduate degree
    in nuclear engineering for the Massachusetts Institute of
    Technology. Both my education and leadership were honed across
    a 36-year career as a nuclear submarine officer and a military
    acquisition professional.
        I have humbly led exceptional teams at all levels with the
    understanding that my calling was to make the people around me
    more effective and achieve greater outcomes than they otherwise
    could have achieved by empowering them, building esprit de
    corps, fostering deep technical competence, and removing
    barriers to their success. As a submarine line officer, I
    completed sea rotations on five submarines across all classes,
    culminating in command of a nuclear attack submarine. I also
    served as military assistant for Assistant Secretary of
    Defense, charged with both strategic nuclear deterrence and
    non-proliferation policy.
        As a military acquisition professional, I served as major
    program manager for lifecycle sustainment of operational,
    strategic, and attack submarines, oversaw research and
    development activities of the Naval Undersea Warfare Center
    Laboratories, established a program executive office to focus
    on cradle to grave of lifecycle activities for all nuclear
    strategic ballistic missile submarines, and eventually served
    as a principal deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy, charged
    with overseeing the procurement and sustainment of all Navy and
    Marine Corps weapon systems.
        This has all led me to this unique moment in time where, if
    confirmed, my expertise and experience would align well with
    the leadership necessary for NNSA, to overcome generational
    challenges and deliver programs of record to meet national
    security needs. I understand the complexity of the threats and
    the critical importance of the NNSA mission. I have a deep
    understanding of naval nuclear propulsion, from construction
    and testing, through operations, lifecycle sustainment, and
    eventual decommissioning.
        I oversaw the recapitalization of our sea-based strategic
    nuclear deterrent and work closely with other stakeholders
    engaged in nuclear modernization efforts to include United
    States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) Strategic Assistance
    Programs, the United Kingdom Dreadnought Alliance, and other
    legs of the U.S. nuclear triad.
        I supervised contract performance in our nuclear ship
    builders and led the standup of a navy industrial based team to
    spearhead data driven assessment of the submarine supply chain,
    and collaboration across U.S. Department of Defense and
    Congress to target industrial base investment in critical
    infrastructure, supply chain capacity and resilience,
    manufacturing, technology, workforce attraction, recruitment,
    training, and retention.
        I believe that if confirmed the lessons I have learned on
    my Navy journey would translate well to the NNSA journey that
    must ultimately modernize the nuclear stockpile in supporting
    infrastructure without disrupting production activities to
    ensure that the Nation maintains a safe, secure, reliable, and
    credible strategic nuclear deterrent.
        I understand this is a no fail mission. I am honored and
    humbled to be considered for this nomination and look forward
    to answering your questions. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Vice Admiral Pappano follows:]

                Prepared Statement by Vice Admiral Scott Pappano
        Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed, and members of the committee,
    thank for your consideration of my nomination to be the Principal
    Deputy Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration
    (NNSA) at the U.S. Department of Energy. Since first taking the Oath of
    Office in July 1985, I have devoted my entire adult life to serving our
    Nation as a commissioned officer in the Navy, and I thank President
    Trump and Energy Secretary Wright for affording me the opportunity to
    shift course and continue my public service in a greater and more
    impactful capacity. I also need to thank my wife of 34 years--Kate--for
    joining me here today and for her service to the Nation as commander-
    in-chief of the Pappano household. Nothing I have achieved would have
    been possible without her love and support, and her commitment to
    raising our children throughout my frequent absences is a testament to
    her strength and resilience--we are both proud of the adults our
    children have grown up to be.
        Foundational qualifications to serve as Principal Deputy
    Administrator of NNSA include an extensive background in organizational
    management and being well-qualified to manage nuclear weapons,
    infrastructure construction and maintenance, non-proliferation, and
    material disposition programs in a manner to enhance and protect U.S.
    national security through the military application of nuclear energy. I
    believe that, if confirmed, my background, experience, and expertise
    would be well-suited to execute the duties of this office. I also
    believe deeply in the mission--strategic nuclear deterrence is
    fundamental to our national security and modernizing our Nation's
    nuclear weapons stockpile, nuclear forces, and supporting
    infrastructure is a critical national security priority.
        My qualifications are founded upon the bedrock of a strong
    technical education with an undergraduate degree in marine engineering
    from the U.S. Naval Academy and a graduate degree in nuclear
    engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Both
    my education and leadership were honed across a 36-year career as a
    nuclear submarine officer and military acquisition professional. I have
    humbly led exceptional teams at all levels with the understanding that
    my calling was to make the people around me more effective and achieve
    greater outcomes than they otherwise could have achieved by empowering
    them, building esprit de corps, fostering deep technical competence,
    and identifying and removing barriers to their success. As a submarine
    line officer, I completed sea rotations on five submarines across all
    classes, culminating in command of a nuclear attack submarine. I also
    served as a Military Assistant for an Assistant Secretary of Defense
    charged with both strategic nuclear deterrence and non-proliferation
    policy. As a military acquisition professional, I served as major
    program manager for lifecycle sustainment of operational strategic and
    attack submarines, oversaw research and development activities of the
    Naval Undersea Warfare Center labs, established a program executive
    office to focus on cradle-to-grave lifecycle activities for all nuclear
    strategic ballistic missile submarines, and eventually served as
    Principal Deputy to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy charged with
    overseeing the procurement and sustainment of all Navy and Marine Corps
    weapon systems.
        This has all led me to this unique moment in time where, if
    confirmed, my expertise and experience would align with the leadership
    necessary for NNSA to overcome generational challenges and deliver
    programs of record to meet national security needs. I understand the
    complexity of the threats and the critical importance of the NNSA
    mission. I have a deep understanding of Naval nuclear propulsion--from
    construction and testing, through operations, lifecycle sustainment,
    and eventual decommissioning. I oversaw the recapitalization of our
    sea-based strategic nuclear deterrent and worked closely with other
    stakeholders engaged in nuclear modernization efforts to include
    STRATCOM, Strategic Systems Programs, the United Kingdom Dreadnought
    Alliance, and other legs of the U.S. Nuclear Triad. I supervised
    contract performance at our nuclear shipbuilders and led the stand-up
    of a Navy industrial base team to spearhead data-driven assessment of
    the submarine supply chain and collaboration across the U.S. Department
    of Defense and Congress to target industrial base investment in
    critical infrastructure, supply chain capacity and resilience,
    manufacturing technology, and workforce attraction, recruitment,
    training, and retention.
        I believe that, if confirmed, the lessons I have learned on my Navy
    journey would translate well to the NNSA journey that must ultimately
    modernize the nuclear stockpile and supporting infrastructure--without
    disrupting production activities--to ensure the Nation maintains a
    safe, secure, reliable, and credible strategic nuclear deterrent.
        I understand this is a no fail mission. I am honored and humbled to
    be considered for this nomination, and I look forward to answering your
    questions.

        Chairman Wicker. Thank you both for your excellent
    testimony.
        At this point, I am required to ask standard questions that
    we ask of every civilian nominee. So, if both of you would turn
    your mics on and just answer yes or no into the microphone.
        Have you adhered to applicable laws and regulations
    governing conflicts of interest?
        [Both witnesses answered in the affirmative.]
        Chairman Wicker. Have you assumed any duties or taken any
    actions that would appear to presume the outcome of the
    confirmation process?
        [Both witnesses answered in the negative.]
        Chairman Wicker. 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?
        [Both witnesses answered in the affirmative.]
        Chairman Wicker. Do you agree to provide records,
    documents, and electronic communications in a timely manner
    when requested by this committee, it's 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?
        [Both witnesses answered in the affirmative.]
        Chairman Wicker. Will you ensure that your staff complies
    with deadlines established by this committee for the production
    of reports, records, and other information, including timely
    responding to hearing questions for the record?
        [Both witnesses answered in the affirmative.]
        Chairman Wicker. There may be some from this hearing. Will
    you cooperate in providing witnesses and briefers in response
    to congressional requests?
        [Both witnesses answered in the affirmative.]
        Chairman Wicker. Will those witnesses and briefers be
    protected from reprisal for their testimony or briefings?
        [Both witnesses answered in the affirmative.]
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much.
        Now we'll proceed to questions. I'm going to defer my
    questions until later and recognize for the first questions,
    Chairwoman Fischer, who is chair of the Strategic Subcommittee
    and along with Senator King has done yeoman work in the subject
    matter of nuclear security. So, Madam Chairwoman, you are
    recognized.
        Senator Fischer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you,
    Ranking Member Reed. Thank you, gentlemen for being here today
    and for your willingness to continue to serve this country.
    Admiral, thank you for coming in to visit. I appreciated you
    taking time and the conversation that we had.
        If confirmed, can you tell me how you will work to ensure
    that NNSA weapons production remains on schedule?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Thank you, Senator. Yes, if
    confirmed, obviously, shifting to production is a key element
    right now for us to modernize the nuclear weapons stockpile
    right now. We've done a very good job of stockpile management
    in a science-based manner and kept that over the years.
    However, now we have to transition that from the science-based
    stockpile management to actual production facilities and make
    sure we modernize those facilities, making sure that we don't
    lose the science in the process and continue that going
    forward.
        I'll do that by looking across how we are modernizing our
    facilities right now, and try to bring as much advanced
    manufacturing capability as we can. As we look at the Manhattan
    Era Project buildings that we're dealing with, a lot of these
    facilities as we modernize those, bring in modern technology so
    that we can be much more effective going forward in our
    production of nuclear weapons stockpile.
        Senator Fischer. Thank you.
        We talked a little bit about NNSA's 25-year Enterprise
    Blueprint, a roadmap to modernize the infrastructure there, and
    some of which as you brought up in our discussion, it dates
    back to the Manhattan Project. We won't be able to produce the
    weapons that we need without the facilities needed to process
    materials like uranium, lithium, high explosives that go in
    those nuclear weapons. So, anything we can do as you look at
    that modernization process, please let us know.
        Mr.--can you say your last name? I think the chairman
    mispronounced it.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No, not at all. I heard it all, ma'am.
    Cadenazzi.
        Senator Fischer. Cadenazzi.
        Chairman Wicker. Take that back.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Fischer. I take that back. Both the Department of
    Defense and NNSA have similar challenges with their industrial
    bases, and I believe that we have an opportunity now to address
    underlying issues in a way that strengthens both the nuclear
    industrial base and the defense industrial base.
        If confirmed, do you commit to working closely with NNSA
    and the Department of Energy on policies like increasing our
    skilled manufacturing workforce that would impact both of those
    industrial bases?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, I appreciate the question. The
    significance of it, particularly in light of the workforce
    issues and access to materials that we're facing across the
    industrial base, these are major challenges that both the NNSA
    and the broader defense industry face and are dealing with. If
    confirmed, I'm thrilled at the opportunity to speak to you
    about how and where the Industrial Base Policy Office and I
    might be able to focus.
        Senator Fischer. Great. What we've seen happen in the
    Ukraine war has shown us that militaries and modern conflicts,
    they expend munitions at a much faster pace than we ever
    expected before. Our stockpiles must be adjusted to account for
    this, and we must expand our munitions production capacity. We
    have to expand that.
        We've taken some steps to address it in recent years, and
    we have the opportunity to make those generational investments
    through the reconciliation process. In your opening statement,
    sir, you said that production must be scaled now before
    conflict starts. I agree with that. If confirmed, what steps
    would you take to accomplish that goal?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Appreciate the question again, Senator. The
    issue of munitions production, is the top of the priority list
    and something I've discussed with multiple Senators on this
    Committee. I'm excited to work with the Committee, if
    confirmed, on this topic.
        There are a couple of major things that I think will drive
    this. One is predictable and stable defense budget and program
    spend. So, the more we can stabilize that, the more industry
    we'll be able to align around it. A better understanding of
    industry, of what the expectations for surge capacity are, will
    make it clear what the potential opportunities are for them and
    the level of capital required to increase facilities and
    workforce.
        That's a major opportunity for the Department to articulate
    what would be a big, hairy, audacious goal in business school
    terms. To go ahead and say, we need a lot more capability from
    you and we need to agree then on the investment required to
    meet that point.
        We need to scale the workforce as well. There are many
    initiatives underway to improve workforce capabilities across
    the country. We need to grow those and take advantage of small
    businesses as well. If confirmed, these are all exciting
    opportunities for us to help address what is an obvious and
    well-reported gap on this issue.
        Senator Fischer. Are you familiar with the Department's
    National Defense Industrial Strategy?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I am Senator, yes.
        Senator Fischer. Do you have any concerns with that
    strategy or think that there are gaps there that still need to
    be addressed?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, I think the strategy is solid.
    Given the expectations of the previous Administration and the
    goals they were looking to achieve, I've reviewed the external
    open-source material for that and the associated implementation
    plan. If confirmed, I'm eager to work with the Industrial Base
    Policy Office, the Administration, and the committees to
    understand what changes we believe are necessary. I'm happy to
    work with you on that and to make sure that we tune that to
    meet the current needs of the moment, particularly in light of
    the changing requirements of the new Administration.
        Senator Fischer. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Wicker. Madam Chairwoman, it may not be adequately
    staffed at the Department, and that's something we'll want to
    talk about. The way I understood how to pronounce the witness's
    name, was he said it rhymes with snazzy. I now recognize my
    distinguished Ranking Member, Mr. Reed from Rhode Island.
        Senator Reed. Well, thank you. I'm just amazed that you
    can't pronounce a simple name like Cadenazzi and Pappano. Hey,
    this is amazing.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Reed. Okay. Mr. Cadenazzi.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Cadenazzi.
        Senator Reed. Cadenazzi. I have an Italian--I grew up in
    Cranston and Knightsville with all the Italians from Itri.
        The recent tariffs enacted by the Trump administration will
    have a definite impact on the defense industrial base, and if
    they're matched by reciprocal tariffs, that will exacerbate the
    impact on the supply chain, the cost of materiel. So, how will
    you assess the impacts of the tariffs on DOD and the defense
    industrial base, and how do you intend to work with the
    industrial base to deal with this issue?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, I appreciate the question and the
    significance of it. The tariffs were a complicated non-linear
    set of decisions being made on the global scale. I do think
    you're right that there are impacts to the industrial base.
    However, I'm not currently aware of any particular analysis
    regarding the particular impacts on the aerospace and defense
    industrial base. I understand that the purpose of the tariffs
    for a whole-of-government approach to reshape certain elements
    of the economy, manufacturing, access to materials, some of
    which we agree are good. Increased domestic manufacturing,
    increased domestic production are good things. Where we can
    achieve those ends, we should be pleased to work on that
    subject.
        If confirmed, I'm excited to work with the Committee, with
    you, and with the industrial base to understand what the
    impacts on the industrial base will be, any negative impacts,
    and to prepare actions necessary to mitigate the effect of
    those negative impacts over time.
        Senator Reed. Another aspect of this whole tariff situation
    is that part of, I think the way to accelerate the growth of
    our industrial base is to partner closely with our allies. But
    we're involved with a heated discussion with Canada and other
    natural allies about tariffs. I think that will inhibit our
    ability to cooperate and to integrate with them and to expand
    quickly our industrial base. What view do you have on that?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, our allies and partners at the
    industrial base level are critical. There's an incredible,
    robust exchanges between companies and between countries that
    enable us to work and operate and actually enable substantial
    weapons sales overseas. Last year's, 2024's defense exports
    total exceeded $300 billion. Those relationships remain strong.
    I'm convinced that there's still robust interest across
    companies to work with their partners wherever possible.
        I see substantial opportunities for us to increase that
    collaboration, particularly in the sharing of the sale of
    parts, assemblies, sub components, those kinds of things where
    we can go ahead and close gaps and mitigate efforts, issues
    that we have in the domestic U.S. defense industrial base, by
    working more closely in a more targeted way with our allies and
    partners. So, if confirmed, I'm excited to work on that.
        Senator Reed. If you see a severe impact of tariffs on our
    production in the United States, our industrial base, will you
    let this Committee know very rapidly?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, of course.
        Senator Reed. Thank you. Admiral Pappano, again, thank you
    for your extraordinary service in the submarines. They are our
    key tier in the deterrence and the nuclear triad. Thank you.
        You're going into NNSA right now, and you've got the
    highest demand since 1980's in terms of nuclear weapons and
    nuclear systems. At the same time, you're trying to rebuild an
    aged infrastructure. I'm being polite.
        But recent actions by DOGE [Department of Government
    Efficiency] in coming in and dismissing people, and then many
    times, 5 days later, hiring them back, which is even more
    disturbing. The 2000 Federal workforce that NNSA had, is now
    down to about 1,650. They're at perhaps a breaking point in
    terms of not only the demands on them to do the job, but also
    this sense of, ``Will I be going next week or will I still be
    here?'' How are you going to respond to this morale problem and
    this personnel problem?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Thank you, Senator. I'm not fully
    apprised of all the hirings and firings or goings on personnel-
    wise inside NNSA right now, only what's available, open source.
    However, if confirmed, that will be a top priority of mine.
    Understanding what that workforce needs, making sure it is
    properly resourced in people and funding as required to
    accomplish this no-fail mission of recapitalizing our strategic
    nuclear infrastructure, and getting back to weapons production.
        Senator Reed. Thank you very much, sir. Again, thank you
    for your service, both of you.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you, Senator Reed. Senator Budd.
        Senator Budd. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you both for being
    here. Thanks to your families as well, for your long service
    and your willing to continue in service in these unique and
    important roles.
        Mr. Cadenazzi, and we'll just go with sir for you, since
    we've had all the challenges of pronunciation. On April 4th of
    this year, China's Ministry of Commerce, they imposed export
    restrictions on seven rare earth elements in magnets. So,
    giving our ongoing heavy reliance on China, for many of these
    rare earths, there's an increasingly unacceptable level of risk
    to our ability to produce everything from planes to munitions.
    The United States should have created a rare earth supply chain
    independent of China a decade ago.
        Companies like Vulcan Elements, which is a rare earth
    magnet manufacturer that's fully decoupled from China, and is
    based in North Carolina, they're attempting to do just that.
    But efforts need to accelerate and accelerate at scale. So, in
    your advanced policy questions, you discussed your intent to
    leverage the DPA or the Defense Production Act, as well as the
    Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment, or the IBAS, to
    support private sector investment in our defense industrial
    base.
        So, if confirmed, how will you leverage these authorities
    to end our reliance on China for rare earths?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, this is a critical opportunity for
    the country to go ahead and increase its ability to develop
    domestic resources and decrease our reliance on China within
    the industrial base. If confirmed, I'm eager to work with this
    Committee, with you, on the issues associated with the
    application of DPA and IBAS as direct opportunities to increase
    our investment into the domestic mineral production chain. I
    believe DPA and IBAS collectively invested over $540 million
    into these resource developments efforts over the past few
    years.
        We can continue that. We should. There are other additional
    capabilities we should explore: partnership with allies to go
    ahead and secure additional resources and increase production
    capabilities, recycling. There's numerous strategies which are
    available to us to go ahead and take advantage of this time in
    this window where there's some sense of urgency about it.
    Before we lose that sense of urgency, I believe we need to make
    real initiatives and real effort to go ahead and close the gap.
        So, if confirmed, Senator, it's an exciting opportunity and
    time for us to help on that.
        Senator Budd. Thank you for that answer.
        So, if confirmed, will you commit to working with not only
    this Committee, but also the Banking Committee to make
    improvements to the DPA?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Absolutely, Senator.
        Senator Budd. Thank you. The Committee on Foreign
    Investment in the U.S. or CFIUS, is also primarily within the
    banking jurisdiction, but the Department of Defense and the
    Industrial Base Policy Office in particular, play an important
    role in reviews conducted by the committee. I frequently hear
    folks from North Carolina, including those that are military
    installations in North Carolina with concerns about foreign
    investments, specifically from China, near military
    installations.
        So, do you see a need for the DOD to improve engagement on
    the topic of foreign investment risks to national security?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, thank you for the question. This is
    a critical topic and one that's at the top of the list for the
    industrial based policy office, currently. The CFIUS office,
    the associated authorities around identification of adversarial
    capital and adversarial companies, Chinese companies working in
    the defense industrial base, is a top priority for the office.
        All those issues around purchasing of land and those sort
    of things around military installations. This is something that
    I think requires additional resourcing to look at. I believe
    that those issues are understaffed relative to the demand to
    look at all the transactions that are potentially high risk. If
    confirmed, I'm eager to work with you and the Committee to
    understand--the other committees to understand what can be done
    to bring additional scrutiny to bear on this topic and what we
    can do to resource the analysis that's required.
        Senator Budd. Thank you.
        You mentioned additional resources. I think that's
    important. Do you see bottlenecks of the DODs engagement on
    this issue?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, I'm not aware of any particular
    bottlenecks that currently exist. I'm aware that there's a
    significant number of transactions that have been looked at and
    there's a belief generally that there's a need for more.
    However, I can't comment specifically on what the scale of that
    gap is. If confirmed, I'm eager to understand and work with you
    to understand what is additional resources would be required to
    close any gap relative to the risk exposure we're willing to
    tolerate.
        Senator Budd. Thank you for that. Admiral, a question. This
    is different than SMRs, which are often talked about, but what
    are your views on using modular micro reacts as an
    expeditionary power source and how do you balance their
    adoption with security and the concern about proliferation?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Thank you, Senator. If confirmed,
    obviously there's some significant potential with micro
    reactors and what we could do with those either in civilian or
    military application. Certainly, if confirmed, I'll work with
    the NNSA administrator and the Secretary of Energy to make sure
    that we are properly monitoring and overseeing what we would do
    with those micro reactors to make sure we don't have a
    nonproliferation condition.
        Senator Budd. Thank you both for your time. Chairman.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much, Senator Budd. Senator
    Hirono.
        Senator Hirono. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome to both of
    you and your families. Going to the fitness to serve question,
    I ask the following two initial questions of all nominees
    before any of the committees on which I sit, so I will ask you.
        We'll start with Mr. Cadenazzi. Since you became a legal
    adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors
    or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a
    sexual nature?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No.
        Senator Hirono. Mr. Pappano? Admiral?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. No.
        Senator Hirono. Have you ever faced discipline or entered
    into a settlement relating to this kind of conduct?
        [Both witnesses answered in the negative.]
        Senator Hirono. For Mr. Cadenazzi, I championed a provision
    in last year's NDAA that created a program focused on advanced
    manufacturing capabilities in the Indo-Pacific to more quickly
    construct unmanned systems and parts for ships and submarine
    repairs, and this program is essential to bolstering deterrence
    in the region. DOD and the services have always struggled to
    coordinate industrial based modernization efforts.
        How do you plan to foster greater integration across the
    services for this important program?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, I appreciate the question. This is
    a critical issue. Hawaii represents a significant portion of
    the organic industrial base and our broader defense industrial
    base. There are many tools we have to bring alignment across
    the industrial base initiatives that are there and the groups
    that are responsible for it.
        The first thing is leadership. That is the wherewithal to
    go ahead and get into the weeds. The macro issues, I think,
    thankfully, there's a substantial number of authorities and
    resources available that are made available by the Congress
    over time to the DOD to take action on these issues.
        At the micro level, we need to get into the details to
    understand where individual organizations may not be getting it
    with regards to the opportunities here, in particular, the new,
    I think, acquisition and industrial based executive order does
    a good job to highlight the acquisition personnel to workforce
    training initiatives, and things that we can do to go ahead and
    drive more understanding into the leaders at the tactical
    level, we need to make decisions to invest in the integration
    of the industrial base.
        Senator Hirono. I hope that you will focus on this aspect
    of what we need to do, because I know you are aware that Indo-
    Pacific is the largest AOR [area of responsibility], and we
    need to provide flexibilities when the ships are out to sea and
    they need to have flexibility and repair and doing all the
    things that will keep them going.
        So, I hope that you'll visit Hawaii and see for yourself
    the capabilities that we need to strengthen. Again for you, I
    have met with small businesses in the past as they struggle to
    comply with the requirements to meet the cybersecurity maturity
    model certification requirements, and it's pretty complicated,
    and they have a hard time complying, as I said.
        So, I am prioritizing a provision in this year's NDAA that
    would require the DOD to provide additional support and
    innovative tools for small businesses to ensure that they are
    aligned with DODs CMMC requirements, allowing them to save
    money and contribute to diversifying the defense industrial
    base that you are very focused on strengthening.
        What are your thoughts on the provision that would require
    DOD to provide more assistance to small businesses to enable
    them to work with you all?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, this is a critical topic, and it
    has been a bit of a roadblock for small businesses over time.
    It's great that you're bringing this issue up. Within the small
    business office, within the Industrial Base Policy Office,
    there's a program called Project Spectrum, which is intended to
    go out to small businesses that are operating in the defense
    sector to help them go ahead and get the resources and
    understanding and analysis they need to accelerate and reduce
    the cost of their compliance with CMMC.
        If confirmed, I'm eager to work with you on this provision,
    your proposals going forward. I think anything we can do to
    streamline the requirements while also ensuring a more robust
    and resilient security and base for our cyber infrastructure,
    is critical opportunity for the Department and we should look
    at that.
        Senator Hirono. Should you be confirmed, as I believe you
    will be, that I would like to work with you on how we can
    better strengthen this part of our supply chain. Because
    without our small businesses, many of whom are dropping out of
    working with the DOD for a number of reasons, including
    complying with the security requirements. So, this is something
    that I would want to be very specific in following up with you.
        One more question for you. The COVID-19 pandemic and
    geopolitical competition with China has exposed the deep
    fragilities in the United States defense supply chain, as we
    mentioned. So, for example, we remain heavily reliant on
    foreign sources for critical earth elements. So, what steps do
    you plan to take to address this significant issue?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, I appreciate the question. The
    issue of access to raw materials, rare earths in particular, is
    one that is particularly challenging. The Industrial Base
    Policy Office has invested over $540 million in the past on
    these topics. I think we need to accelerate and invigorate
    those investments, but also align them to the most critical and
    impactful opportunities that'll have the most impact on our
    most critical near-term needs.
        Whether that's munitions lethality or readiness, we should
    make those decisions in those investments promptly and get them
    moving so we can see the impact as soon as possible. If
    confirmed, I look forward to working with you on that issue.
        Senator Hirono. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you, Senator Hirono. Senator Sheehy.
        Senator Sheehy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I'll start with you, Admiral. You talked about the
    Manhattan Project in your comments, and I think you know, that
    was an era when the Government was oftentimes the hot bed of
    innovation, and I think we can all agree that's not the case
    anymore. So, as we're looking at--you know, I was reading about
    China having a salt-based fission reactor online just recently,
    which of course is a huge leap in technology.
        How are you going to incentivize private industry
    innovation to make sure that we either regain or stay in the
    lead for nuclear innovation around the world?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Yes. Thank you for that question,
    Senator. Obviously, you know, our national labs, our strategic
    labs, they are really leading edge on some of this innovation
    and technology and really a national treasure for all of us.
    So, I want to make sure we continue that science-based approach
    that we have at our national labs, but also making sure that we
    take the opportunity to coordinate with other business and
    other academic institutions to go leverage what other
    innovations are going on across the country.
        Senator Sheehy. For example, there's a number of smaller
    companies innovating in micro reactors, and they're having a
    very hard time getting access to processed fissionable material
    so they can proceed with, not just their development, but
    actually the production of these items. How can you streamline
    the access of this material? Of course, it has to be
    controlled, and we have to vet these companies, but many of
    them are vetted and are capable of receiving this material, yet
    they'll wait years on a very simple approval. How can you
    expedite that?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. I'm not fully apprised, Senator, on
    all of the details within NNSA on the processes for that, but I
    commit that I will work with the NNSA administrator and the
    Secretary of Energy and as necessary, the Department of Defense
    to make sure I look at those processes and find ways to
    streamline those as appropriate.
        Senator Sheehy. You know, our triad is from a bygone era.
    Our B-52s are coming up on 70 years old as far as the
    airframes. Our silos in Montana for the minuteman, you know,
    those are half a century old technology, if not older, and you
    know, luckily our undersea leg of the triad is pretty healthy,
    but we can't build those subs fast enough, as you know. So, how
    are you going to contribute to a revitalization of that triad
    to make sure we are competing with and leading China and other
    near peers?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Yes. Thank you for the question,
    Senator. Obviously, I'm completely aligned with you on the need
    to recapitalize all legs of our nuclear triad right now. If
    confirmed, NNSA's key role in that is making sure we maintain
    the nuclear stockpile stewardship as we move into production of
    new weapons. Also look for, obviously, innovative technologies
    or innovative ways to design weapons or weapons materials
    through advanced technologies to get after weapons production
    more quickly going forward here.
        Senator Sheehy. Mr. Cadenazzi, regarding acquisition
    reform, I think in the past 25 years since the global war on
    terror started, we've all seen every lab accelerator, you know,
    innovation unit, lots of little tents are stood up saying,
    ``We're going to change innovation for acquisition. We're going
    to accelerate acquisition, we're going to get geared to the war
    fighter.''
        All we hear is a lot of offices stood up, a lot of money
    spent, but very little progress is made. It's time for real
    progress, as we've seen across the world in Israel and the war
    in Ukraine. Defense acquisition has to turn a page and be
    fundamentally restructured, so we can buy things faster. We can
    welcome more suppliers to our industrial base. Welcome them,
    not scare them away with unneeded regulation and burdensome
    compliance requirements like Senator Hirono just mentioned.
        So, what are the top three things you're going to do as
    fast as you can do, besides ask for more money, to actually
    change the defense acquisition paradigm, to broaden our
    industrial base and strengthen it?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, I appreciate the question. It was a
    pleasure to talk to you last week. Thank you for the time. So,
    when it comes to the acquisition reform process, I think former
    Secretary Kendall said it best that, ``There's no such thing as
    acquisition reform, there's just acquisition improvement.'' I
    think that holds true, that there's a lot to be done.
        My particular focus in this area is centered on a couple of
    particular things. One, is to more fully leverage the available
    authorities like middle tier of acquisition, other transaction
    authority, through education of the acquisition workforce. I
    think the new executive order captures that we need to move
    that into law and make sure that that becomes something that's
    driven in a more actionable way by the Department.
        Two, is predictable, stable budgets will allow us to go
    ahead and mitigate some of the risks associated with how the
    industrial base and the programs respond. They make plans,
    budgets change, and then necessarily their activities in the
    industrial base alignment around them have to change as well.
        Then, third, is anything we can do to sort of decrease the
    level of regulation, the level of difficulty in getting access
    to work. So, you mentioned new vendors, new companies. We want
    that. We now have a time when there's a lot of new interest in
    the Defense Department in serving it. We should take advantage
    of that as every way we can.
        If confirmed, I'm excited to work with you and the
    committee on that issue.
        Senator Sheehy. Well, our acquisition structure usually
    fights the last war, and in my era, it was the MRAPV, the Mine
    Resistant Armor Protected Vehicles. Bob Gates pushed those
    through. We got it done and saved a lot of lives, including a
    lot of folks I know.
        Chairman Wicker. Here. Here.
        Senator Sheehy. But it came too late. Instead of innovating
    after our 17, 18, 19-year-old kids are dying on the
    battlefield, let's innovate beforehand. Because they're the
    ones that are going to pay the price for our failures. So, for
    both of you, I ask you, you focus heavily on the reforms we
    need because we need to be ready next time. Thanks.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you, Senator Sheehy. Senator King,
    before I recognize you, let me just followup Mr. Cadenazzi. On
    middle tier acquisition needing to be put into law, I trust
    you've read my FoRGED Act?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes, Senator.
        Chairman Wicker. That the enactment of that would be one of
    the very ways we could statutorily authorize these sorts of
    things.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Absolutely, Senator. I think it's a critical
    improvement on the process along with rescissions and the
    various changes to other laws that are mentioned in it.
        Chairman Wicker. Good. Well, Senator Reed and I and the
    Committee are hard at work on that. We hope we could do it
    quickly. Senator King.
        Senator King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Admiral Pappano, I want to talk about two or three things
    with you: capacity, proliferation, and speed. Capacity, are you
    aware of whether or not there's still a hiring freeze at NNSA?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Senator, I'm not aware of the
    personnel policies at NNSA right now.
        Senator King. Well, I think capacity is a concern because
    the staff level is down 8 or 9 percent since January. I believe
    the hiring freeze is still in place, and yet, as you've
    testified today, you have some pretty serious responsibilities,
    particularly with the upgrading of the triad.
        So, I hope that that's something you can look into,
    followup on, advocate for, having the adequate capacity in
    order to meet the responsibilities that are being thrust upon
    you. Is that something you can work toward?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Yes, sir. If confirmed, I commit to
    you that I will advocate for the men and women of NNSA, make
    sure that we have the right amount of people, the right skill
    sets, the right training, and the right resources to accomplish
    the mission that we have to do.
        Senator King. I appreciate that. A piece of the
    responsibility of NNSA that isn't talked about all that much is
    proliferation and anti-proliferation around the world. The
    reason I consider that so important is our whole defense
    strategy is based upon the idea of deterrence. If terrorists
    get a hold of nuclear material, deterrence doesn't work. They
    don't have a capital city to bomb. They don't care about dying.
        So, that is a true nightmare scenario. That makes non-
    proliferation, anti-proliferation an incredibly important
    responsibility right now, because of the fact that terrorist
    groups are still out there. Al Qaeda, ISIS [Islamic State of
    Iraq and Syria] are on the rebound in many parts of the world.
    So, I hope that you'll put some emphasis and real focus on the
    proliferation responsibilities of NNSA.
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Yes, thank you for that, Senator. Of
    course, if confirmed, I will focus as well on non-proliferation
    and counterproliferation. We sometimes get bogged on and
    focusing on weapons production and strategic deterrence. But
    another critical mission of NNSA is the non-proliferation
    counterproliferation, making sure we provide the tools
    necessary to prevent the spread of nuclear materials.
        Senator King. The technology, the development of the
    technology, for example, to detect nuclear material. That would
    be a huge breakthrough. I hope that's part of the mission
    you'll pursue.
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Yes, Senator. Thank you. I'm not
    fully apprised of all the programs in progress with NNSA and
    counterproliferation, but clearly the ability to detect nuclear
    materials and do nuclear materials forensics, is a key mission
    of NNSA that I will certainly prioritize to go after the things
    that you suggest there, if confirmed.
        Senator King. Final question for you. As the Chairman
    mentioned, Senator Fischer and I have been working on these
    issues together for some years. I'm concerned about the speed
    of NNSA's development of the next generation warhead capacity
    pits. For example, because we're moving forward pretty fast on
    the B-1 bomber, on the Columbia-class submarine. We're
    beginning work on Sentinel, but we want to have--but all that's
    for naught if we don't have the modern warheads available.
        So, speed, I think, is an issue that you're going to have
    to look at. I have not been overly impressed, I guess I would
    say with the with the execution of, for example, as I
    mentioned, pit production.
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Yes, thank you, Senator. I share your
    concern for urgency on this and make sure we move out quickly
    here and properly. Part of that in my view is, if confirmed,
    taking a look at what the barriers are to that speed, making
    sure we attack those barriers, whether it's policies or
    processes that we need to overcome, whether it's bringing
    technology to bear and how we design or build or manufacture
    equipment.
        But anything that we can do to speed the process and make
    all the very effective people more effective in what they do
    through technology.
        Senator King. I think the key word you used is urgency. Mr.
    Cadenazzi, I don't have as much time. I do have a suggestion on
    the issue of smaller businesses, which several senators have
    talked about. Call your own 800 number in effect. What I mean
    by that is, have a red team pretend to be a small business
    applying to the Pentagon and see what the barriers are, see
    what the requirements are, how many pages are the requirements.
    I have found that very effective over the years to actually
    experience what a potential contractor would experience.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, appreciate the point there. As I've
    formally founded and ran and sold multiple small businesses, I
    know the pain of difficulty of working with the Department of
    Defense. I concur with you entirely, that's a great reminder on
    the practical experience of that. So, thank you for the
    suggestion.
        Senator King. There've been a lot of discussion about
    workforce in this Committee and workforce is one of the key
    bottlenecks, and we can't ignore the fact that we could put
    billions of dollars into some area of defense procurement, and
    there just aren't the people to build a weapon system.
        So, I think strong attention to workforce and to building
    the workforce, and to providing the amenities necessary to
    attract the workforce into our defense industrial base, is
    going to be a big part of this job. It's not just a question of
    money, it's a question of being sure the people are there to do
    the welding.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, I wish we could have some Top Gun
    Maverick style movie that was going to talk about just how
    incredible the opportunity is to work at the shipyards in
    Virginia and elsewhere across the industrial base.
        Senator King. Maine. There are two in Maine.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Oh, in Maine, sorry, and Mississippi as
    well. Sorry.
        Senator King. This is Virginia.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I got you there, Senator. But I think we're
    going to have to do the hard work of actually developing
    apprenticeship programs, looking at the application of
    scholarships, Pell grants for welding, the kind of things that
    we've had these discussions in the past. Now's the time to move
    ahead on making sure that people understand the significance of
    these jobs, the economic opportunities to grow and live,
    families, the importance of this. We need to make people feel
    valued in these jobs as well.
        If confirmed, I'm eager to work with this Committee with
    you and with the rest of the Congress on programs that'll
    actually accelerate, increase the movement of workforce into
    the defense industrial base.
        Senator King. Thank you very much. I'll just leave you with
    one phrase, consistent demand signal. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Agree totally.
        Chairman Wicker. Well, that's a good phrase. But also,
    Senator King, you said to Vice Admiral Pappano, and it applies
    to both witnesses, the word urgency needs to have meaning right
    now. So, thank you very much for that line of questioning.
    Senator Shaheen.
        Senator Shaheen. Good morning. Welcome to both of you.
    Thank you for being here and for your willingness to continue
    to serve the country.
        I couldn't agree more with you, Mr. Cadenazzi, on your
    response to Senator King's question about workforce, and I
    think the Maine and New Hampshire delegations are both very
    proud of our Portsmouth Naval Shipyard and the mission of the
    workforce there and the good work that they do. So, I think you
    explained very well what the benefits are of working on the
    civilian side in the defense industry.
        Chairman Wicker. Of course, you got your education in the
    State of Mississippi, Senator Shaheen.
        Senator Shaheen. I did, and so, I know how important
    Mississippi is to the ship building too, Senator Wicker. You
    said in your remarks that you weren't aware of the impact of
    the tariffs on the aerospace industry, and I just wanted to
    give you an example.
        Last week, I visited a company called New Hampshire Ball
    Bearings that makes bearings for the aerospace industry, solely
    does a lot of its business with the defense industry. What they
    told me is that as the result of the steel tariffs, the
    uncertainty around that, and the President's intent to raise
    the tariffs on steel, that their lead time for steel has gone
    from 20 weeks to 2-\1/2\ years.
        So, think about that. What the impact of that is going to
    be on our defense industrial base and our ability to supply the
    military with what they need. Which has already been under
    stress, as we've seen, as the result of the war in Ukraine.
        So, I just want to followup on Senator Reed's question
    about how you expect to keep track of the impact of these kinds
    of tariffs on the defense industrial base, and how do you think
    about addressing the shortage of steel? Which is not just a
    shortage in terms of capacity, but they said as the result of
    the tariffs. Their one domestic suppliers has increased prices
    significantly because they're able to do that because of the
    tariffs and they can't get supply from our allies, which they
    had been doing, which helped with both the cost and the
    availability. So, how do you think about addressing that
    problem, because that's significant.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, I appreciate the question and your
    concerns on this issue. As I mentioned before, the tariffs
    issue is significant and obviously is going to have impact in
    differential ways. First, I'm not aware of any analysis that
    the Industrial Base Policy Office has produced in this. I
    presume that they have, but I have not been provided with that.
    So, I'd be loath to go ahead and provide an assessment of what
    the Department believes the impact is in the industrial base
    right now.
        It is likely wide and varied. There's probably pockets
    where they're benefiting from it and other pockets where you're
    highlighting one of the challenges.
        Senator Shaheen. Well, not to interrupt, but----
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes, ma'am.
        Senator Shaheen.--I think the concern is, is there an
    analysis that's been done? Where does that start and what are
    we seeing as a result of these tariffs over time? It's not at
    all clear to me that that analysis has been done. Certainly,
    I'm not aware that this Committee has seen any of that work.
    So, I think that's number one, we need to see that.
        Second, we need to track what happens and to feel like we
    are responding to the shortcomings that we're seeing as the
    result of policies. So that we're not further handicapping our
    defense industry.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, if confirmed, I commit to come back
    and make sure to provide whatever analysis has been done, and
    if there's particular requests for the type of analysis on the
    mix of companies you're talking about, or particular technology
    area. I'm happy to work with you on those issues as well.
    That's critically important.
        Regarding the steel issue specifically, again, I'm not
    aware of any particular analysis on the impact of tariffs on
    steel or the steel in the context of the industrial base. The
    industrial base consumes a lot of domestic steel. So, there's
    some unique characteristics of that relative to other
    industries. Again, if confirmed, I'm eager to discuss this
    issue with you and what can be done to mitigate the issues on
    the industrial base.
        Senator Shaheen. Good. Thank you. I appreciate that.
        Chairman Wicker. That's a pretty good answer, isn't it,
    Senator Shaheen?
        Senator Shaheen. The proof is in the pudding.
        Chairman Wicker. Right.
        Senator Shaheen. Admiral Pappano, since the invasion of
    Ukraine, this Committee has supported the National Nuclear
    Security Administration's cooperation with Ukraine by
    monitoring Russian occupied power plants in Ukraine and
    training the Ukrainians to detect radiation releases. This
    cooperation has been really important. Particularly as we look
    at Russian attacks on the largest power plant in Europe, the
    Zaporizhzhia Power Plant.
        Can you speak to the importance of NNSA's cooperation with
    Ukraine, especially during ongoing negotiations?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Thank you, Senator. I am not fully
    apprised at all the details of that cooperation right now. But,
    if confirmed, I would make sure that NNSA provided the tools
    and capabilities to go do those verifications so that we could
    monitor, verify whatever we need to do as far as the
    Administration desires.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you, Senator Shaheen. Senator
    Warren.
        Senator Warren. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for
    being with us today.
        So, artificial intelligence presents big opportunities and
    big risks for national security. Federal agencies should
    benefit from AI innovation, but instead, a few big tech
    companies could lock the Government into expensive anti-
    competitive products. I'm working with Senator Schmitt on this
    and last month, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
    published guidance to ensure that the Government can, ``Benefit
    from a competitive American AI marketplace.''
        The guidance does not apply to DOD, but is all the more
    important at DOD, given the billions of dollars that DOD is set
    to give out in AI and cloud contracts. So, today, I want to
    just run through some of the lessons from OMB's guidance.
        Number one, interoperability. A big tech contractor could
    build its cloud tool so that works only with its own AI, which
    would trap DOD into paying sky high prices potentially for
    subpar products. That is why OMB encouraged agencies to require
    AI tools to work with other companies' products.
        Mr. Cadenazzi, do you agree that DOD would benefit from
    interoperability?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, I appreciate the question. I'm not
    familiar with the term interoperability as defined in that
    particular report. But more broadly, in general, yes, it's a
    great thing for the Department to secure.
        Senator Warren. Okay, good. I'm going to take that as a
    yes. That you think the product should be able to work with
    other products, work in connection.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. In general, more connectivity and
    flexibility to enable a networked approach is a good thing for
    software.
        Senator Warren. Good. We're at the same place then. Let's
    do another one. Data use. The biggest AI contractors can also
    stomp out competition by training their models on troves of
    government data so that smaller companies don't stand a chance.
    This is a disaster for competition and a disaster for data
    security.
        Data on the location of our servicemembers or on DODs
    contracts should not be anywhere near a commercial AI model,
    for example. The White House is clear here. It says contractors
    should not use government data to train publicly or
    commercially available AI algorithms without an agency's
    permission.
        So, Mr. Cadenazzi, do you agree it's important for both
    competition and data security to limit contractors from
    training their government tools--from training their commercial
    tools on government data?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, I appreciate the question. In
    general, yes, I'd say we want to make sure we're following the
    law with regards to the application of these tools.
        Senator Warren. No, that's not my question. This is not a
    question of law yet. This is just a question of what we should
    be doing in our acquisitions at DOD.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. So, Senator, I'm not familiar with the White
    House particular guidance on this issue, but as you laid it
    out, it seems to make sense and I would be supportive of
    discussing that with you, if confirmed.
        Senator Warren. Look, government contracts for AI and for
    cloud tools should one, prevent lock-in, and two, protect
    government data. That's all we're talking about here.
        Senator Schmitt and I have a bipartisan bill to make sure
    that DOD contracts do exactly that. Next week, we will
    reintroduce the Protecting Cloud and AI Competition in Defense
    Act to make sure that billions of dollars in DOD contracts go
    toward fueling innovation in AI and cloud technology, and not
    just helping the biggest companies get even bigger.
        So, let me ask you, Mr. Cadenazzi, will you commit to
    working with me and with Senator Schmitt to stop any
    competitive practices by big tech that could threaten our
    national security?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, artificial intelligence represents
    the most promising capabilities for transformational
    productivity and impact to the Department. I would be thrilled
    if confirmed, to work with you and Senator Schmitt on this
    issue.
        Senator Warren. That looks good. I look forward to working
    with Senator Schmitt and with you and all of the Members of
    this Committee. I think we could make some real progress here.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Thanks, Senator.
        Chairman Wicker. This Senator yields back her time. Now,
    Senator Kaine, I haven't asked my questions yet. Do you think I
    should?
        Senator Kaine. I'm not in a rush, Mr. Chair.
        Chairman Wicker. No, go ahead and ask your questions,
    Senator.
        Senator Kaine. Well, thank you, and congratulations to the
    nominees. You're both very qualified. I look forward to
    supporting you.
        I want to begin, actually just by putting some breaking
    news on the record. This morning, the Secretary of Defense,
    Pete Hegseth, tweeted as follows, ``This morning, I proudly
    ended the Women Peace and Security Program inside the
    Department of Defense. WPS is yet another woke divisive social
    justice Biden initiative that overburdens our commanders and
    troops distracting from our core task, war fighting. WPS is a
    United Nations program pushed by feminists and left-wing
    activists, politicians fawn over it, troops hate it. DOD will
    hereby execute the minimum of WPS required by statute and fight
    to end the program for our next budget. Good riddance, WPS.''
        I wanted to read this because that tweet contains some
    glaring inaccuracies that are far beneath the standard we
    should expect from a Department of Defense. First, ``WPS is yet
    another woke divisive social justice Biden initiative.'' WPS
    was passed by a unanimous vote in the Senate in October 2017,
    when the Senate was majority Republican and Donald Trump was
    president, and he signed it.
        Does our Secretary of Defense not know the difference
    between a bill that was passed by the Biden administration, or
    one that was passed and signed in the Trump administration?
        Second, ``Politicians fawn over it. Troops hate it.'' I
    returned to the hearing this Committee had to consider the
    confirmation of General Caine, and I read the following
    testimony.
        ``Senator Shaheen: General Caine, congratulations on your
    nomination. One of the things that we discussed was the Women
    Peace and Security legislation that was signed by President
    Trump during his first term. It mandates that women should be
    at the table in conflict resolution and peace negotiations. At
    DOD, that's men having women involved in security cooperation
    programs that really give us, I think, an advantage over our
    adversaries like China and Russia. Just for the record, are you
    familiar with the WPS program, General Caine?
        General Caine. I am Senator, yes.
        Senator Shaheen. Do you believe that it's a DEI [diversity,
    equity, and inclusion] program?
        General Caine. I do not.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Can you provide some examples
    of the operational advantage that from your perspective, this
    gives us?
        General Caine. Well, Senator, I can just give you my own
    personal recollections from being deployed. Before this was
    precursors of the program, but when we would go out into the
    field and after concluding an assault, we would have female
    members who would speak with those women and children who were
    on the objective, and they would help us to understand the
    human terrain in new and novel ways.
        So, WPS is, I think, a program that really helps us to
    understand the full spectrum of challenges that are in front of
    us.''
        From the testimony of our confirmed chairman of the Joint
    Chiefs of Staff. If the Secretary of Defense cannot understand
    the difference between a Biden initiative and a Trump
    administration, and when the Secretary of Defense claims that
    troops hate something that the newly confirmed head of the
    Joint Chiefs of Staff appreciates, I have to add this to the
    1,000 questions about the judgment of this secretary that I've
    already raised.
        I'm stunned at the lack of professionalism that this tweet
    demonstrates. Look, we aired out pretty carefully at this
    hearing, the Secretary's own antipathy to women in service, and
    his own track record of poor treatment of women in leadership
    positions. The fact that he doesn't like WPS, that's one thing.
    But the fact that he claims that it's a Biden initiative when
    it isn't, an initiative that was supported unanimously by a
    Republican majority Senate, and that troops hate it when the
    newly confirmed head of the joint chiefs of staff testifies to
    its value, I find shocking.
        Now, I'll go to my questions if I could. Admiral Pappano,
    you were asked a question earlier about recruiting and hiring
    within NNSA, and you pointed out that you weren't fully up to
    speed on the current. But I want to go back. The Goverment
    Accountability Office (GAO) did a report in May, 2024 that I
    imagine you probably are aware of. It discussed challenges that
    the NNSA faced in recruiting and retaining staff because of
    intense competition with other industries and other agencies.
    This is a skill set that's in pretty high demand.
        So, should you be confirmed, how would you approach that
    challenge, making sure that we keep the good talent we have and
    continue to attract new talent in an important place where
    there's a lot of competition in the private sector and the
    public sector too?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Thank you for the question, Senator.
    Yes, if confirmed, I will certainly advocate for the men and
    women of NNSA and laboratories understanding that there's a
    unique skill set critical to national security. Everywhere from
    skilled trades up to weapons designers and nuclear physicists.
        It is sometimes hard to find those people, and we need to
    make sure that we are doing everything we can to go attract,
    recruit, train, retain those people as part of national
    security. That could start everywhere from looking at programs
    in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics K-12
    up to colleges, what opportunities we have out there to go get
    people interested in that line of work and develop them going
    forward.
        Senator Kaine. I'm sure you probably have the tools you
    need to do that, but should you find that you don't, please let
    the Committee know if there are additional tools we can provide
    to help you meet that mission.
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Thank you, Senator. If confirmed, I
    look forward to working with the Committee if I need additional
    tools.
        Senator Kaine. I yield back, having taken the 38 seconds
    that Senator Warren undershot.
        Chairman Wicker. The gentleman has nothing to yield back.
    Senator Rosen.
        Senator Rosen. Well, thank you, Chairman Wicker, Ranking
    Member Reed holding this hearing, and gentlemen, thank you for
    your willingness to serve.
        I want to move on to small business defense production
    because, Mr. Cadenazzi, Nevada's home to a growing number of
    small businesses, manufacturers, technology startups that have
    capabilities that could directly support our national security.
    These companies are highly innovative, but they face
    significant challenges when it comes to breaking into the
    defense marketplace, which remains dominated by large incumbent
    contractors.
        The current acquisition system is too slow, too complex,
    and too risk adverse to effectively engage with non-traditional
    players. So, Mr. Cadenazzi, if confirmed, how do you plan to
    address the systemic barriers in order to create a more open
    and competitive environment for small businesses and emerging
    technology firms including those like in my State of Nevada,
    that have not traditionally played a large role in defense.
        More specifically, what are your priorities for
    streamlining the acquisition pathways for these companies? How
    can the Department of Defense better leverage innovation across
    all 50 states as part of a broader industrial base strategy?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, thank you for bringing this topic
    up. The small business office within the Industrial Base Policy
    Office is a critical element of what the Department counts on
    us to bring policies, priorities, and a focus on small
    businesses. They represent some of the most dynamic and
    innovative parts of the economy, particularly in the places
    that are offering the technology. That's the most exciting
    going forward. Artificial intelligence, quantum mechanics,
    machine learning, and advanced manufacturing.
        So, this is a major priority for the Department and for me.
    Going forward, I want to understand more about what the
    Industrial Base Policy Office's programs are doing, what effect
    they're having, things like small business innovative research,
    where we work with the R and E component of the Department
    project, the apex accelerators which exist across the country,
    to go ahead and provide access to small businesses to
    understand the Department. If confirmed, I'm eager to learn
    more about those capabilities, what the resourcing is, and what
    we can do to accelerate the impact over time.
        Senator Rosen. I'm glad to set up a meeting with you and
    talk about a lot of things happening in Nevada. So, thank you.
        But I'm going to move on to nuclear testing, building a lot
    on the Nuclear Security Administration. Of course, Admiral
    Pappano, I asked a similar line of questioning to Congressman
    Williams at his confirmation hearing. Given your potential role
    as his deputy, I'm going to ask you the same questions.
        So, as I'm sure you do know, the Nevada National Security
    Site, NNSS, formerly known as the Nevada Test Site--Nevada
    still call it the test site--was the primary location for U.S.
    nuclear testing from 1951 to 1992 with 100 atmospheric tests
    and 828 underground tests. I lived there during those times of
    the underground tests. Trust me, that ground would shake like
    nobody's business once a month.
        This era, unfortunately, left lasting radioactive
    contamination across millions of acres, exposed countless
    people to dangerous radiation. It's an outcome that we must not
    repeat. Since the 1992 testing moratorium was signed by
    President George H.W. Bush, the NNSA has used subcritical
    experiments to ensure the safety, reliability, and
    effectiveness of our nuclear stockpile without the need for
    explosive testing.
        For decades, its approach has received annual validation
    from the heads of National Labs, United States Strategic
    Command (STRATCOM), the secretaries of defense and energy,
    including throughout the first Trump administration. Despite
    this consensus, some have advocated for a return to explosive
    nuclear testing. Can you imagine?
        Experts warn such a move can encourage countries like
    Russia and China to follow suit risking a new dangerous and
    unnecessary nuclear arms race. So, Admiral Pappano, I'm just
    going to ask you to answer yes or no, same as I did the
    Congressman.
        If President Trump sought your counsel on restarting
    explosive nuclear testing, would you advise the resumption of
    explosive nuclear testing?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Based on what you suggested there--
    Senator, thank you for the question. But if confirmed, I would
    not advocate for nuclear testing based on the amount of data we
    have, from explosive testing, our extensive modeling simulation
    capability, subcritical testing capabilities, and the annual
    verification.
        Senator Rosen. Thank you. The second question I'm going to
    ask you is, given that the stockpile has been annually
    certified as safe and effective without explosive testing, do
    you see any technical or strategic justification for resuming
    explosive testing?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Thank you, Senator. Again, based on
    the amount of explosive test data that we have, the model
    simulation capability, subcritical testing capabilities at the
    Nevada test site among other places, and the annual
    verification, I do not see a need to return to explosive
    testing. I would not advocate for that, if confirmed.
        Senator Rosen. Normally, I would ask a longer answer, but I
    just want to ask you if you will commit to prioritizing ongoing
    scientific advancements in stockpile stewardship?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I look forward to
    enhancing anything we can do technology-wise in advancing
    stockpile stewardship, science-based.
        Senator Rosen. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Wicker. Senator Rosen, I understand that the
    massive casino hotels back in the day would alert their
    customers and patrons as to when a nuclear explosion was going
    to be had so that they could watch. Isn't that correct?
        Senator Rosen. Yes, it is that. In fact, there's still some
    bars and lounges called the Atomic Lounge and other things that
    are still there. You're absolutely right. I would love to lead
    a congressional delegation to Las Vegas and come see not only
    the test cycle, one mile underground, where they do the
    subcritical testing, it's amazing, but also to the Atomic
    Testing Museum, which gives you all the history of what they
    did.
        It's quite informative and the test site going down
    underground in that tunnel where they do those tests, it's
    pretty amazing.
        Chairman Wicker. Might be educational, Senator Reed. But
    the publicity surrounding a congressional delegation trip to
    Las Vegas would be a negative.
        Senator Rosen. We'll go straight. We can land at Nellis Air
    Force base, the crown jewel of the Air Force, thank you very
    much, and we can head right over there, see the remote sensing
    lab and the Nevada test site. We'll put the curtains down, you
    don't even have to see the Las Vegas strip.
        Chairman Wicker. Well, don't go overboard.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Rosen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Wicker. Senator Kelly, you are recognized.
        Senator Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do have to point
    out though, that the museum you mentioned, which I have been
    to----
        Senator Rosen. It's amazing.
        Senator Kelly.--it's in Las Vegas.
        Senator Rosen. It is. It is. It's at the university,
    though.
        Senator Kelly. Yes.
        Senator Rosen. It's at the university.
        Senator Kelly. It's a great museum. I highly recommend it.
        Senator Rosen. Research institute.
        Senator Kelly. Vice Admiral Pappano and Mr. Cadenazzi--am I
    pronouncing that correctly?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Cadenazzi, close.
        Senator Kelly. Cadenazzi, thank you. Thank you both for
    being here. Mr. Cadenazzi, I'd like to understand your plan to
    enhance our critical mineral stockpiles. So, the United States,
    we import nearly 100 percent of our cobalt sulfate and cobalt
    metal requirements despite cobalt playing a critical role in a
    lot of defense technologies. Meanwhile, China produces more
    than 70 percent of the world's refined cobalt.
        It's imperative that we decouple and substantially bolster
    our domestic critical mineral supply chain. So, given the
    national security importance of these rare minerals, such as
    cobalt, how do you plan on supporting American cobalt and other
    critical mineral processing companies?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, I appreciate the question and the
    significance of this issue. I've spent more time looking at the
    periodic table of elements now since I have, like in my
    chemistry class in high school.
        China's clearly weaponized the periodic table of elements.
    They've made efforts to go ahead and secure access to materials
    that we require within the defense industrial base. The
    Industrial Base Policy Office has made investments totaling
    $540 million into various mineral capabilities, processing
    source materials over the past several years.
        If confirmed, I'm eager to understand more about the
    particular issues associated with cobalt, but also the broader
    needs for access to strategic and critical minerals, and ensure
    that we're taking the necessary action to ensure American
    requirements are met domestically or through allies and
    partners over time.
        If confirmed, I'm eager to work with you on that subject,
    Senator.
        Senator Kelly. Now, do you think we should have our own--
    build our own stockpile of critical minerals?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, yes, absolutely. We do have a
    strategic and critical materials stockpile in place now. I'm
    not aware of the scale of that relative to the demand of the
    industrial base. However again, if confirmed, I'm here to work
    further on this and understand the scale of required investment
    of both government and private capital necessary to secure
    access to those materials.
        Senator Kelly. Thank you, and, Admiral, in your advanced
    policy questionnaire, when asked what your main priority will
    be as the principal deputy administrator, you responded that
    you would work to maximize the efficiency, effectiveness,
    capability, and capacity of NNSA. I want to followup on this
    because while I agree on the priority, I'm concerned that
    recent freezes on civilian hirings and the firing of
    probationary employees across the Federal Government will
    hamper your ability to accomplish your priorities, and
    ultimately, the agency's mission.
        Part of that mission is to stockpile nuclear weapons and
    reduce the overall global nuclear threat. To accomplish this
    mission, the agency employs nuclear physicists, and other
    highly technical professionals. These professionals cannot be
    mass produced and are incredibly difficult to coax into Federal
    service.
        So, how do you assess the recent firings and termination
    letters for NNSA employees and how that will affect your
    ability to accomplish the agency's mission?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Thank you for the question, Senator.
    I agree that that is a critical workforce. Right now, I am not
    fully apprised about the details of what is happening at NNSA.
    I only read about what I see in the news. But if confirmed, it
    will be a priority of mine to make sure that I assess the
    workforce needs, the resourcing of the number of people, and
    whatever facilities, training, capability they have, whatever
    we need to do to attract, recruit, train, and retain that
    critical workforce will be a priority of mine.
        Senator Kelly. Do you see that one of your first
    responsibilities, if confirmed, is to make sure you have the
    workforce you need?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Thank you, Senator. Yes, certainly.
    Having the critical workforce, if confirmed, is something I
    will assess and make sure I advocate for the men and women of
    NNSA and the National Laboratories to make sure they are
    resourced properly to accomplish this no fail mission
        Senator Kelly. Admiral, DOD is at an unfortunate
    intersection here, where all legs of our nuclear triad are
    needing modernization at the same time, and this modernization
    requirement has a direct impact on the NNSA. Additionally,
    civil service integration is critical for the agency's mission.
    The NNSA's partnership with the scientific and academic
    community is paramount for maintaining our comparative
    advantage.
        How are you planning on managing the modernization projects
    with infrastructure recapitalization efforts that span civil
    and Federal infrastructure? You have 3 seconds.
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Thank you, Senator. I will
    certainly--another priority of mine will be to assess the
    enterprise blueprint going forward and making sure we look for
    where the barriers are, the driving, getting the enterprise
    recapitalized, all the infrastructure recapitalized, look for
    opportunities for where we can insert modern manufacturing
    technology to drive a sense of urgency in our stockpile
    stewardship programs.
        Senator Kelly. All right. Thank you, Admiral.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you, Senator Kelly. Let me ask a
    question basically a yes or no question to each of you.
    Congress is in the process of attempting to pass a
    reconciliation bill much of which will deal with the Defense
    Department. Because of the rules that we are required to
    operate under, the Defense Reconciliation Bill must be
    unspecific as to how the money is spent and will technically be
    at the discretion of the Department of Defense, and we are
    required in the rules to write recommendations for how the
    money is spent.
        Do you commit to follow unequivocally, the Congress's
    spending recommendations in the Defense Reconciliation Bill?
    Mr. Cadenazzi?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes, Senator.
        Chairman Wicker. Admiral Pappano?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Yes, sir. I look forward to working
    with this committee on prioritizing.
        Chairman Wicker. Very good. Now I think we've talked about,
    Mr. Cadenazzi, we've talked about middle tier acquisition. This
    is something that my legislation, the FoRGED Act would very
    much address. I believe you told me that you had read the Act
    and liked much of it. If you want to expand on that answer?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. More praise for the Act? Absolutely,
    Senator.
        Chairman Wicker. Yes, right. Yes, heap that on.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Keep going. Yes, sir. Please go on.
        Chairman Wicker. Okay. I do believe, I think, once you're
    confirmed, you're going to have some middle tier authorization
    already. But I can say that Senator Reed and I are very much
    likely to put much of the FoRGED Act in the NDAA--in the
    upcoming NDAA. I hope you won't wait for that. If you have
    tools such as other transaction agreements and middle tier
    acquisition, will you commit to going ahead with that?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Senator, thank you for the point.
    Absolutely. I'm excited to use all the available authorities
    more aggressively to make sure we're meeting the needs of the
    industrial bases, and the delivering what the Department needs
    at this critical time. If confirmed, I'm eager to work with you
    and Ranking Member Reed on this issue going forward.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much. Now I think you are
    going to have a staffing shortage. If you are able to do the
    things that we've talked about today, you're going to need
    people that look at production rates and limiting factors in
    the supplier base. Isn't that right?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes, Senator.
        Chairman Wicker. You're going to need to have people that
    actually visit the production lines to assess whether companies
    are doing things the right way, spending money the right way,
    and that sort of thing. Is that correct?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes, Senator.
        Chairman Wicker. You're going to need people who develop
    options when we ask questions like, how do we build more
    munitions? Which I think we've had testimony today that often
    we spin down on munitions more quickly than we intend to.
    You're going to need people to do that, are you not?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Absolutely, Chairman Wicker.
        Chairman Wicker. But unfortunately, the size of the office
    remains only a handful of people. As my understanding, only
    five government people work on the Defense Production Act. Do
    you know that number to be correct? Am I'm well informed there?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Chairman Wicker, I'm not aware of exactly
    how many people are working in any element of the components of
    the Industrial Base Policy Office at this time.
        Chairman Wicker. If that is true, and I think it is. That
    represents a crisis, which is why we have already required a
    staffing plan for these functions in last year's fiscal year,
    NDAA, the statute under which we're operating today.
        So, will you bring us this plan as soon as possible, Mr.
    Cadenazzi?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes, Chairman Wicker.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much. Now Vice Admiral
    Pappano, what you are going to be tasked with, you and others,
    is going to require a huge infrastructure investment. Am I
    correct there?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Yes, Senator.
        Chairman Wicker. Would you advise the committee as to how
    you're going to do that and exactly what you're going to need?
    Am I correct, you're going to need more workforce by a great
    deal to get this done?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If
    confirmed, certainly it'll be a priority of mine to look across
    the enterprise blueprint plan. Make sure we don't have to
    reinvent the wheel there. But assess how that plan goes forward
    and our infrastructure investments over the next 25 to 50
    years, and then figure out where the barriers are to getting
    that done with urgency. Whether it's policy, procedure,
    whatever we need to go look at to make sure we can break down
    those barriers and drive more urgency into our infrastructure
    recapitalization. Then obviously, the workforce that goes along
    with that, that we need to demand that infrastructure for our
    stockpile stewardship and the production.
        Chairman Wicker. Senator Reed and I have been told that
    this is going to be one of the largest infrastructure
    requirements that the Federal Government has ever had. Are we
    well advised on that?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do not
    know that as a fact, but it seems a reasonable assumption to
    make that is a significantly large infrastructure. We talk
    about recapitalizing, you know, the Manhattan Project Era
    facilities and driving those into the future.
        Chairman Wicker. I think the public needs to be aware of
    this. This is most important, and again, Senator King and
    Senator Fischer have taken the lead on this.
        Let's talk about cooperation with our allies on industrial
    base policy. There's been talk in recent years about this.
    AUKUS [Australia, United Kingdom, United States] Pillar 2
    production diplomacy in Europe, the partnership for the Indo-
    Pacific Industrial resilience. But most people think there's
    been very little success in that regard. Do you have an opinion
    as to whether we're way behind in that area, Admiral?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Certainly,
    I'm aligned with President Trump's Peace Through Strength,
    which a part of that I think is our willingness to work with
    willing partners and allies to increase our overall strength. I
    think that in my experience, we've done pretty well with that
    so far. Some of the strategic nuclear deterrents cooperation
    we've had with the United Kingdom. There's a lot of history
    there in that. Then obviously starting to move forward with the
    AUKUS Accords. The work is going on with the Pillar One and
    Pillar 2 of AUKUS.
        Chairman Wicker. Well, there may have been some infighting
    within the Department about this particular task. So last year
    we made it clear in the NDAA that the acquisition
    undersecretary owns these issues like the ones I have
    mentioned. If confirmed, you'll oversee the low-level Deputy
    Assistant Secretary of Defense designated to be the lead on
    this issue. Right now, that position has maybe a dozen members,
    inadequate number, many of whom are not from industry.
        Will you commit to us and to this Committee, that you will
    work on the issue of stagnation and industrial base integration
    with our allies, such as the areas that I've mentioned?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Certainly,
    if confirmed, I'll commit to you that I will work with this
    Committee and partners and allies as necessary to drive this
    forward.
        Chairman Wicker. Mr. Reed, I believe we've covered a lot of
    things. I think the questions have been very good, and it
    appears to me that we've got the right folks in place for these
    positions. Does anyone else have anything? If not, let's see if
    I need to make any announcements. Are we good to go?
        Questions for the record will be due to the Committee
    within two business days of the conclusion of the hearing,
    which is right now. Thank you.
        [Whereupon, at 11:03 a.m., the Committee adjourned.]

        [Prepared questions submitted to Mr. Michael P. Cadenazzi,
    Jr. by Chairman Wicker prior to the hearing with answers
    supplied follow:]

                            Questions and Responses
                           duties and qualifications
        Question. What is your understanding of the duties and functions of
    the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy?
        Answer. My understanding is the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
    Industrial Base Policy (ASD(IBP)) is the Under Secretary of Defense for
    Acquisition and Sustainment's principal advisor on maintaining a
    healthy and resilient defense industrial base (DIB). This includes
    supply chain vulnerability analysis, oversight of the Committee on
    Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) and the mergers &
    acquisitions (M&A) process, assessing risks associated with adversarial
    capital, developing policies for modern economic competition, promoting
    small business participation, and strengthening partnerships with
    industry and international allies and performing assessments,
    developing strategies and policies to ensure the DIB can meet DOD
    requirements.
        Question. What background and experience do you possess that
    qualify you to perform these duties? What background or experience, if
    any, do you have in industrial base issues, including supply chain
    management?
        Answer. I have spent the past 20 years working in and on the DIB.
    The majority of my time was spent either as the owner of a defense
    industry small business or as a management consultant working directly
    with the defense industry on their many strategic, manufacturing and
    supply chain challenges. I have worked for domestic and international
    firms across nearly every conceivable product and service category.
    Through this I have developed a deep understanding of the defense
    industry, its challenges and, critically, the many opportunities for
    improvement.
        In addition, I served 10 years on active duty in the United States
    Navy. My service provided me with an understanding of the warfighter's
    mission and needs. My Active Duty experience informs and reinforces the
    urgency which I apply to my work for the defense customer.
        This industry, its companies and their work have been and remain my
    professional passion.
        Question. If you are confirmed, what duties and functions do you
    expect that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
    Sustainment will assign to you?
        Answer. I anticipate duties prescribed by statute (10 U.S.C. Sec.
    138(b)(6)) and DOD policy, including oversight of industrial base
    resilience, industry engagement, international armaments cooperation,
    foreign investment reviews, domestic supplier competition reviews,
    small business programs, incentives and loan guarantees, and priorities
    and allocations, including the Defense Production Act (DPA) program. I
    will work closely with the Under Secretary and across the Department to
    ensure a robust and secure DIB.
        The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy
    (ASD(IBP)) is the principal advisor to the Under Secretary of Defense
    for Acquisition and Sustainment (USD(A&S)) for all industrial base
    policies and related matters. If confirmed, in supporting the USD(A&S),
    you will be responsible for establishing policy and conducting
    oversight of the defense industrial base which supports the acquisition
    and sustainment of our military forces.
        Question. What background or experience, if any, do you have in
    ensuring and implementing supply chain management and security?
        Answer. I have deep, global experience in the analysis, management
    and improvement of defense industry supply chains. My experience
    includes mapping supply chains, analysis of product/program supply
    chain challenges, and developing solutions to supply chain gaps &
    bottlenecks.
        As a small business owner and entrepreneur, I developed a software
    solution that included automated supply chain mapping and analysis,
    bringing my knowledge of this subject to others. I was also recruited
    for my deep expertise to serve as the key product developer for a
    defense industry supply chain risk analysis software tool.
        Question. What background or experience, if any, do you have in
    conducting global investment reviews and forecasts that help inform
    acquisitions and investments?
        Answer. As a small business owner and entrepreneur, the software
    solution I developed provided analytic tools and generated forecasts of
    US defense spending. I am a legitimate global expert in the analysis of
    defense budgets, investments, acquisitions and the drivers which
    underpin defense industry change at every level.
        In my professional consulting life, I have delivered literally
    hundreds of analyses on defense budgets, markets and forecasts of
    future spend. This has included work for both domestic and
    international clients across a broad array of defense product & service
    categories.
        Question. What background or experience, if any, do you have in
    overseeing commercial mergers and acquisitions or conducting antitrust
    reviews?
        Answer. In my 20 years as a defense industry consultant, I have
    participated in over 50 different M&A related initiatives. My
    experience has spanned every aspect of M&A from strategy development to
    due diligence all the way to post-merger integration. These initiatives
    have also included the impact of anti-trust considerations. In
    addition, I have twice negotiated and completed the sale of my own
    company. These small, but meaningful (to me!), transactions provided
    invaluable experience in the realities of these efforts for buyers,
    sellers and customers.
        Question. What background or experience, if any, do you have in
    developing policy and processes for programs to acquire products and/or
    services, as well as policies and processes for oversight of such
    programs?
        Answer. In my 20 years as a defense industry small business owner
    and consultant, I have experience at every level of defense acquisition
    across a diverse mix of products and services. I have worked on
    everything from requirements to contract execution. I have worked at
    each stage of the program lifecycle from concept ideation to program
    launch through to sustainment.
        Question. What qualifications do you have using modern data
    approaches, tools, and methods that prepare you to maintain visibility
    of, analyze, and manage data on the volume, variety, and complexity of
    the inventory of acquisition and industrial base initiatives and
    programs in the Department?
        Answer. As a small business owner, I created a (at the time)
    cutting edge Software-as-a-Service product focused on the analysis and
    visualization of the U.S. defense budget and associated contract and
    acquisition information. This product embedded my defense industry
    expertise in a fast, multi-purpose, time-saving solution that was in
    use by many defense industry firms. I successfully sold this business
    to a major global consulting company.
        I have also worked on the direct application of data approaches,
    tools, and methods in use by my employers. I have consulted numerous
    firms on their use of data tools to cut costs, increase productivity
    and improve quality. I also have deep experience with the most common
    data tools in use by analysts and experts across the defense industry.
        Question. What background or experience, if any, do you have in
    managing programs which encourage small business and/or nontraditional
    business participation in government contracting?
        Answer. Upon leaving Active Duty Naval service in 2005, I
    participated in the launch of a veteran owned small business focused on
    defense technology development. I subsequently joined a small defense
    industry focused consulting business. After gaining experience in these
    businesses, I personally founded & launched two defense industry small
    businesses. I successfully sold both businesses. In addition to my
    direct work as a small business owner and employee, I have consulted
    numerous prime and mid-tier defense firms on their use of small
    business as a capacity, technology and capability enabler.
        Question. What background or experience, if any, do you have in
    overseeing, pursuing or managing programs that support international
    armaments or security cooperation?
        Answer. In my 20 years as a defense industry business operator,
    employee and consultant, I have led countless international defense
    initiatives. My industry outreach initiatives have spanned:

          More than one dozen countries

          Service to large, middle-tier and startup firms

          Multiple defense sectors and product/service areas

        These outreach initiatives have touched on every aspect of the
    defense market, including:

          Export of U.S. defense systems & technology to
    international allies & partners,

          Import of international defense systems & technology to
    the United States

          Business case analysis and launch planning for U.S.
    businesses seeking to operate in foreign countries

          Business case analysis and launch planning for non-U.S.
    businesses seeking to operate in the United States

        In parallel with these efforts, I have delivered public and private
    presentations to international defense businesses and organizations/
    industry associations.
        Question. What background or experience, if any, do you have in
    overseeing, or managing programs that support industry engagement?
        Answer. In my 20 years as a defense industry business operator,
    employee and consultant, I have led outreach and discussions with
    countless defense businesses. This includes the hard work of cold
    calling new contacts and the sustained effort to build and maintain
    enduring relationships over time.
        My industry outreach initiatives have spanned the full range of
    defense firms:

          Every U.S. prime

          Most U.S.-based subsidiaries of non-U.S. defense firms

          Large numbers of Tier 1 & middle tier firms

          Small businesses

        These outreach initiatives have touched on every aspect of the
    defense market, including:

          Aircraft platforms & related systems/weapons

          Naval platforms & related systems/weapons

          Ground platforms (armor & tactical wheeled vehicles) &
    related systems/weapons

          Space & intelligence

          Sustainment & logistics

          Services

        These conversations have spanned the full mix of defense industry
    leadership priorities:

          Defense industry trends

          Strategy and growth

          Mergers & acquisitions

          Operations & manufacturing

          Supply chain

          Technology

          Workforce & organizational change
        I am fully conversant across a broad range of diverse topics
    immediately relevant to leaders, managers and employees of most defense
    firms. These initiatives have led to myriad projects for defense firms,
    directly impacting their strategy, operations, organization and
    success. In addition, in support of these efforts, I have delivered a
    large number of public and private presentations to defense industry
    firms and organizations/industry associations.
                             conflicts of interest
        Question. Federal ethics laws, to include 18 U.S.C. Sec. 208,
    prohibit government employees from participating in matters where they,
    or certain family members or organizations with which they have certain
    relationships, have a financial interest.
        Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to disclose any
    potential conflicts of interest, including investments, business ties,
    family relationships, or other connections that could be perceived as
    influencing your decisionmaking?
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, that
    if a conflict of interest arises, you will recuse yourself from
    participating in any decisions regarding that specific matter?
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you commit, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    decide matters on the merits, and exclusively in the public interest,
    without regard to private gain or personal benefit?
        Answer. Yes.
                           priorities and challenges
        Question. If confirmed, what are the top priorities you would plan
    to focus on during your tenure as the ASD(IBP)? What would be your
    plans for achieving these priorities?
        Answer. If confirmed, my top priority will be strengthening the DIB
    and its supply chains. This includes assessing and mitigating
    vulnerabilities (especially for critical materials), protecting against
    adversarial capital, supporting small businesses, and fostering
    innovation. I will work to prioritize investments to meet warfighter
    needs and future challenges addressing supply chain bottlenecks.
    Leveraging congressional authorities, I will work with Congress,
    industry, and interagency partners to scale production and surge
    capacity. I also plan to use the DPA to ensure the DIB is working to
    support the warfighter.
        Question. In your opinion, what are the greatest challenges facing
    the defense industrial base?
        Answer. Decades of de-industrialization, fragile supply chains, and
    inconsistent investment have created vulnerabilities in the DIB,
    including reliance on foreign sources for critical components.
    Unpredictable budgets hinder long-term planning, stifle innovation, and
    discourage private sector engagement.
        Question. What would be your plans for addressing these challenges,
    if confirmed?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Congress, the Department,
    and industry to strengthen the DIB by focusing on resilient supply
    chains, expanding small business participation, incentivizing private
    capital investments, and providing stable demand signals. I will also
    prioritize protecting the DIB from adversarial capital and cyber
    threats, and deepening partnerships with allies to reduce supply chain
    vulnerabilities, ensuring our warfighters have the capabilities they
    need.
        Question. By what metrics will you measure your progress toward
    achieving these priorities and addressing these challenges?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will measure progress as a stronger, more
    resilient DIB and enhanced warfighter readiness. Metrics will include:
    shorter lead times and diversified sourcing; domestic manufacturing
    growth and cost-effectiveness; increased small business participation;
    expanded private capital investments in the DIB that are aligned with
    Department priorities; successful technology transition; and joint
    investments with allies. I also plan to rely on proven DOD standardized
    metrics, such as Milestone Completion Rates, Joint Initiative Success
    Rates, Demand Forecast Accuracy data, and Supplier Performance Rating
    data could prove to be assets in shoring up improvements in supply
    chain resilience, DIB cyber security posture, and foreign alliance
    performance. Ultimately, success means reducing readiness shortfalls
    and meeting national security needs.
                             office of the asd(ibp)
        Question. If confirmed, you will serve as the second Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy. Throughout the last
    several years, the Industrial Base Policy office has continually
    amassed important responsibilities while not seeing commensurate staff
    or resource increases to reflect the significant increase in
    requirements.
        How would you ensure the office of the ASD(IBP) is adequately
    resourced (in terms of personnel, budget, and authority) and provided
    with the high-level support necessary to perform its duties and
    responsibilities?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Congress and Department
    leadership to ensure ASD(IBP) has the authorities, expertise, and
    resources--including stable funding--needed to strengthen the DIB. This
    includes advocating for effective use of tools like the DPA to address
    supply chain vulnerabilities. Adequate personnel, budget, and high-
    level support for ASD(IBP) are critical to industrial resilience and
    national security.
        Question. Are there any organizational or legislative changes to
    the office of the ASD(IBP) you believe would be beneficial to carrying
    out the duties of the ASD(IBP)?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will evaluate the ASD(IBP) office's
    structure and authorities. While aware of DPA reauthorization
    discussions, I will withhold specific recommendations until I have a
    deeper understanding of the Department's challenges and opportunities.
    This will inform my recommendations to Congress and the Secretary on
    any necessary legislative or organizational changes.
        Question. How would you work with other offices outside of the
    office of the ASD(IBP) that have key roles in the defense industrial
    base, such as the office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research
    & Engineering, the service ManTech programs, the manufacturing
    innovation institutes, service small business offices, and
    counterintelligence field offices?
        Answer. Effective collaboration across the Department and other
    agencies is essential. I understand that activities like the ManTech
    programs, manufacturing innovation institutes, small business offices,
    and counterintelligence field offices all play crucial roles. If
    confirmed, I will prioritize establishing regular communication and
    coordination mechanisms with these stakeholders to ensure aligned
    efforts and maximize our collective impact on strengthening the DIB.
        Question. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2025, section 904, increased the number of Deputy Assistant Secretaries
    of Defense by two, and the conferees recommended that these two
    positions be used to further strengthen the capabilities of the office
    of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy
    (ASD(IBP)). If confirmed, would you advocate for IBP to receive these
    positions? If so, how would you utilize them?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would advocate for IBP to receive the
    additional Deputy Assistant Secretaries of Defense positions and work
    with the Secretary to prioritize their allocation. I envision focusing
    these roles on critical areas like supply chain resilience and emerging
    technologies but would make final decisions after a thorough internal
    assessment.
                  health of the defense industrial base (dib)
        Question. Over the past several years, there have been increasing
    concerns in Congress, industry, and the Department over the health of
    the DIB and its ability to reliably meet current and future defense
    needs.
        What steps will you take to ensure the DIB has the appropriate
    scientific, technical, and manufacturing workforces to support current
    and future needs of DOD?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work to establish a predictable and
    stable demand signal to assist in enabling a DIB workforce capable of
    meeting current and emerging DOD needs. This requires a balanced
    approach, fostering both traditional trade skills and cutting-edge
    expertise in science, technology, engineering, and manufacturing.
        I will commit to leveraging all appropriate authorities to
    prioritize workforce training and ensure access to the technical
    expertise necessary to produce, sustain, and modernize our weapon
    systems, thereby maintaining DOD's competitive advantage.
        Question. What steps will you take to ensure that the DIB has the
    appropriate manufacturing and production infrastructure to support
    current and future needs of the DOD? If confirmed, how will you measure
    ``appropriate manufacturing and production infrastructure''? What
    metrics will you utilize?
        Answer. If confirmed, ensuring a robust manufacturing and
    production infrastructure for current and future DOD needs will be a
    priority. This will require a comprehensive assessment with OSD
    partners, the Military Departments, and industry to identify capability
    gaps and prioritize investments, as well as prioritize and allocate
    resources to ensure on time delivery, as needed. The robustness of
    infrastructure will be measured by assessing capacity against projected
    demand (including surge), tracking lead times, evaluating cost-
    effectiveness and supply chain resilience, and considering factors like
    advanced manufacturing integration, skilled labor availability, and
    cybersecurity posture.
        Question. What steps should the Department take--on its own or as
    part of a ``whole of government'' approach--to increase domestic
    industrial capacity and reduce reliance on suppliers in China or other
    adversaries?
        Answer. Reducing reliance on China and other adversaries for
    critical defense components requires a decisive, interagency approach
    to strengthen domestic industrial capacity and secure supply chains. If
    confirmed, I will prioritize efforts to onshore and nearshore key
    manufacturing capabilities, leveraging the Department's existing
    authorities--such as the DPA and Industrial Base Analysis and
    Sustainment (IBAS) program--to incentivize private sector investment in
    critical industries.
        If confirmed, I will advocate for policies that drive long-term
    investment in domestic and allied production, protect critical
    industries from adversarial capital and cyber threats, and ensure that
    DOD procurement prioritizes secure, U.S.-based supply chains.
    Strengthening America's industrial resilience will be key to sustaining
    our technological advantage and ensuring national security in an era of
    strategic competition.
        Question. Supply chain tracking and risk mitigation is imperative
    for determining the overall health of the defense industrial base. The
    office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
    Sustainment currently has two ongoing internal efforts related to
    supply chain mapping and transparency. The Office of the Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Sustainment has worked on a supply chain
    mapping tool called Supply Chain Risk Evaluation Environment (SCREEn).
    The Office of Industrial Base Policy has also worked to produce a
    Defense Industrial Base Map (DIBMAP) tool that tracks weapons systems,
    suppliers, and availability in one single place to address supply chain
    risk.
        If confirmed, will you commit to reviewing both tools and
    determining whether continuing with development of both tools provides
    value or whether consolidation and broad use of a single tool would
    provide the Department more value?
        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to reviewing both SCREEn and DIBMAP
    to assess the value of each program and evaluate whether consolidation
    is necessary.
        Question. If confirmed, how do you envision using these tools to
    improve visibility into the defense industrial base?
        Answer. If confirmed, I envision these supply chain tools, whether
    consolidated into a single platform or maintained separately, as
    critical for enhancing visibility into the DIB. They will provide real-
    time insights into potential vulnerabilities, such as single points of
    failure, dependencies on adversarial nations, and emerging bottlenecks.
    This enhanced visibility will inform data-driven decisionmaking
    regarding resource allocation, acquisition strategies, and industrial
    base policy development.
        These tools exist to facilitate improved communication and
    collaboration between government, industry, and international partners,
    enabling proactive risk mitigation and a more coordinated response to
    potential disruptions. By leveraging tools like SCREEn and DIBMAP, we
    can create a more resilient, secure, and transparent DIB capable of
    meeting current and future national security needs.
        Question. If confirmed, one of the Deputy Assistant Secretaries
    that will report to you is focused on industrial base resiliency. What
    is your understanding of how resilience within the defense industrial
    base is currently measured and assessed?
        Answer. I understand that assessing DIB resilience involves a
    multi-faceted approach, encompassing domestic capabilities, reducing
    reliance on adversarial nations, and securing critical material supply
    chains. If confirmed, I look forward to gaining a deeper understanding
    of current assessment methodologies and exploring opportunities for
    improvement.
        Question. Are there other metrics or data frameworks that you think
    should be developed to improve measurement and assessment capabilities?
        Answer. If confirmed as ASD(IBP), I will prioritize developing
    metrics that capture not just current capabilities, but also surge
    capacity, innovation, cybersecurity resilience, and allied
    interoperability. This includes assessing the ability to rapidly
    increase production, the speed of technology adoption, vulnerability to
    cyberattacks, and the capacity for seamless collaboration with allies.
        I will aim to review existing frameworks and incorporate lessons
    learned from new and robust Presidential Directives, such as President
    Trump's 2025 Executive Order on critical minerals and derivative
    products, which highlighted the national security risks of foreign
    dependence and emphasized the importance of bolstering domestic
    production. By developing these additional metrics and incorporating
    the focus on domestic strength and security exemplified by previous
    Administrations, we can gain a more comprehensive understanding of DIB
    resilience and inform more effective policies to ensure its long-term
    strength and adaptability.
        Question. Section 4819 of title 10, United States Code, established
    a framework for modernizing and digitizing the approach for mitigating
    risks to the defense industrial base.
        What is your understanding of the status of implementing that
    framework?
        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to obtaining a deeper
    understanding the implementation of Sec. 4819. This will involve
    conducting a thorough assessment of current progress, identifying any
    roadblocks or challenges, and developing a clear roadmap for completing
    the implementation process. I will also ensure effective coordination
    and collaboration across the Department and with interagency partners
    to leverage existing resources and expertise. Furthermore, I will work
    closely with Congress to provide regular updates on implementation
    progress and address any legislative adjustments that may be necessary
    to ensure the successful execution of this critical initiative. My goal
    is to fully leverage the framework established by Section 4819 to
    create a more secure, resilient, and adaptable DIB.
        Question. What other steps would you take to assess the health of
    the current and future defense industrial base?
        Answer. Beyond existing assessments, if confirmed, I would focus on
    direct industry engagement across all tiers, develop robust data
    analytics for key indicators, conduct wargaming exercises, and
    collaborate with allies to assess collective capabilities.
                          domestic and allied sourcing
        Question. The first Trump Administration and the Biden
    Administration made domestic sourcing a key part of the policy agenda.
    If confirmed, you would oversee the continued push to increase DOD's
    procurement of American-made goods, products, and materials.
        Do you see any associated challenges or opportunities? Please
    elaborate.
        Answer. While prioritizing domestic sourcing offers significant
    opportunities to strengthen the U.S. industrial base and enhance supply
    chain security, it also presents challenges. Rebuilding domestic
    manufacturing capacity in key sectors requires strategic investment,
    workforce development, and a stable demand signal from the DOD.
    Overreliance on domestic sources without considering allied
    capabilities could also limit access to innovation and potentially
    increase costs.
        If confirmed, I will focus on maximizing the opportunities of
    domestic sourcing while mitigating potential challenges. This includes
    targeted investments in critical sectors, leveraging DPA Title III and
    IBAS authorities to incentivize domestic production, and ensuring
    predictable budgeting and acquisition strategies to provide industry
    with the confidence to invest. Simultaneously, I will prioritize
    strengthening partnerships with allies and ``friend-shoring'' to
    diversify supply chains, access cutting-edge technologies, and foster a
    more robust and globally competitive industrial base. This balanced
    approach will ensure we can effectively support our warfighters while
    bolstering American manufacturing and strengthening national security.
        Question. In your opinion, what role should domestic sourcing
    requirements play in efforts to manage the DIB, support domestic
    companies, increase capacity, and ensure trusted and reliable supplies
    of goods and services?
        Answer. Reviving the American DIB must be a top priority. If
    confirmed, I will ensure that every industrial base investment
    decision--whether through the DPA, IBAS, or other tools--is informed by
    an assessment of where it strengthens U.S. production capacity,
    workforce readiness, and supply chain security.
        Question. In your opinion, what role should the Department play in
    reviewing and recommending domestic sourcing requirements prior to such
    requirements going into effect?
        Answer. If confirmed, we should actively coordinate with other
    stakeholders within DOD, such as the Military Departments, innovation
    organizations, and acquisition executives, to ensure alignment with
    broader defense priorities and operational needs. This collaborative
    approach will ensure that domestic sourcing requirements are
    strategically implemented to strengthen the DIB and support warfighter
    readiness, while also considering potential second-and third-order
    effects on the broader industrial ecosystem.
        Question. In your view, what would be the benefits of greater
    Departmental input and involvement prior to domestic sourcing decisions
    being made?
        Answer. Greater DOD input prior to domestic sourcing decisions is
    essential for ensuring these decisions align with national security
    priorities and the specific needs of the DIB. Early involvement allows
    DOD to provide critical insights into the potential impacts of sourcing
    decisions on industrial capacity, supply chain resilience, cost, and
    technological innovation. This proactive engagement can help avoid
    unintended consequences, such as creating bottlenecks or over-reliance
    on single sources.
        If confirmed, I would prioritize ensuring DOD's voice is heard
    early and often in these deliberations, advocating for a more strategic
    and holistic approach to sourcing that strengthens, rather than
    weakens, our defense capabilities. Furthermore, early input allows for
    better coordination with allied nations and fosters a more robust and
    resilient DIB.
        Question. In your view, what steps should the Department take to
    ensure and/or incentivize that companies are able to find needed
    financing and resources from trusted sources?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will prioritize facilitating access to
    trusted financing and resources for DIB modernization, particularly for
    small and medium-sized enterprises and non-traditional suppliers. This
    includes developing and disseminating clear guidance on available
    funding sources, streamlining application processes, and potentially
    exploring innovative financing mechanisms like public-private
    partnerships. Leveraging my interagency experience, I will work to
    identify and address any gaps in existing authorities to ensure
    companies have efficient access to secure and reliable funding.
        Question. What actions should the Department take to address the
    threat of ``adversarial capital'' from China and other sources that
    seek to gain undue influence over the DIB?
        Answer. Combating adversarial capital requires a proactive, multi-
    pronged approach. If confirmed, I will prioritize robust implementation
    of the CFIUS, Team Telecom, Information and Communications Technology
    and Services, and the 1260H List of Chinese Military Companies,
    advocate for increased transparency in foreign investment, and explore
    expanded authorities as needed. Simultaneously, I will seek to foster
    domestic alternatives through trusted sources of private investment to
    protect the DIB from undue foreign influence and safeguard U.S.
    technological advantage.
        Question. If confirmed, how can the Department better leverage
    suppliers in the national technology and industrial base (NTIB) and
    among allies and partners?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work to enhance the NTIB by reducing
    barriers to integrating companies from close allies into the DIB,
    streamlining regulations, and improving reciprocal defense trade.
    Expanding collaboration with private capital, academia, and defense-
    adjacent industries will broaden access to innovation. A whole-of-
    government approach, coordinating across agencies and with
    international partners, is essential for strengthening collective
    defense production, accelerating technology adoption, and ensuring
    supply chain resilience. This will modernize our technological base and
    enhance deterrence.
                            mergers and acquisitions
        Question. The February 2022 State of Competition within the Defense
    Industrial Base report highlights the consolidation of the defense
    industrial base into fewer large prime contractors as a significant
    risk to competition within the DIB.
        In your view, what is the appropriate role for the Department with
    respect to proposed and ongoing private sector merger and acquisition
    activities of DOD contractors?
        Answer. It is my understanding that DOD plays a critical role in
    assessing the impact of M&A activities on the DIB and ensuring that
    consolidation does not undermine competition or innovation. While
    private sector investment and market efficiencies are important,
    excessive consolidation can reduce competition, drive up costs, and
    stifle technological advancements--ultimately weakening the defense
    ecosystem.
        If confirmed, I will work to ensure that the DOD rigorously
    evaluates the implications of M&A activities on the industrial and
    technological base, leveraging its unique perspective to assess
    potential risks to supply chain resilience, innovation, and operational
    readiness. The Department must also maintain active awareness of how
    ongoing M&A activities influence cost, schedule, and performance across
    defense acquisition programs. When appropriate, the DOD should voice
    concerns and work with regulatory agencies to address acquisitions that
    give rise to concerns.
        I will advocate for a proactive approach that strengthens oversight
    mechanisms, enhances interagency coordination, and ensures that
    America's DIB remains competitive, secure, and aligned with national
    security priorities.
        Question. Do you believe DOD's acquisition processes contribute to
    industry incentives to consolidate? If so, what changes would you
    suggest?
        Answer. My understanding is that several factors contribute to
    industry consolidation, including DOD acquisition processes. For
    example, the complexity and cost of complying with DOD regulations can
    create barriers to entry for smaller companies, potentially
    incentivizing them to merge with or be acquired by larger firms.
    Additionally, large, consolidated companies may be perceived as having
    a competitive advantage in securing large defense contracts. However, I
    also recognize the importance of maintaining a competitive and robust
    industrial base that includes both large and small businesses.
        If confirmed, I will carefully review DOD's acquisition processes
    to identify and mitigate aspects that inadvertently discourage
    competition and innovation. This includes examining regulatory burdens,
    contract structures, and promoting greater participation of small and
    non-traditional businesses. Fostering a more diverse industrial base is
    essential for resilience and technological advancement.
        Question. In your opinion, does DOD focus enough on the potential
    consolidation of sub-contractors and suppliers in addition to prime
    contractors?
        Answer. It is my understanding that while the DOD has made strides
    in recognizing the importance of supply chain resiliency, more
    attention needs to be focused on the potential consolidation of sub-
    tier suppliers and subcontractors. A lack of visibility into these
    lower tiers poses a significant challenge to fully assessing and
    mitigating supply chain vulnerabilities. While I understand the
    Department is exploring ways to enhance visibility, I believe we must
    accelerate these efforts.
        If confirmed, I will conduct a review of current departmental
    initiatives aimed at increasing visibility into sub-tier suppliers to
    leverage their expertise in this area. This review will focus on
    identifying any gaps in data collection and analysis, as well as
    exploring opportunities to leverage existing authorities and emerging
    technologies to improve supply chain mapping and monitoring. Based on
    this review, I will make recommendations to enhance our understanding
    of the sub-tier landscape, including the impact of mergers and
    acquisitions. This improved visibility is crucial not only for
    assessing the potential risks of consolidation, but also for
    proactively identifying and supporting critical sub-tier suppliers,
    fostering a more robust and resilient DIB.
                            organic industrial base
        Question. In your opinion, what role does the organic industrial
    base play in modernization efforts and in the sustainment of
    warfighting capabilities?
        Answer. The Organic Industrial Base (OIB) is absolutely essential
    for both modernizing and sustaining warfighting capabilities. It
    provides a unique and irreplaceable foundation for ensuring readiness
    throughout the lifecycle of DOD weapon systems. The OIB's core
    capabilities--including maintenance, repair, overhaul, and upgrade of
    critical systems--are often not commercially viable or readily
    available in the private sector. This is especially true for
    specialized equipment, legacy systems, and surge capacity requirements.
    The OIB also produces critical supply chain materials that do not have
    commercial or civilian application. The OIB serves as a vital
    repository of technical expertise and skilled personnel, preserving
    institutional knowledge and providing a crucial training ground for
    future generations of maintainers and engineers.
        If confirmed, I will focus on modernizing the OIB through
    investments in advanced manufacturing, workforce development, and
    improved facilities, recognizing its strategic importance for long-term
    readiness and reduced reliance on external sources. I will emphasize
    its value as a strategic asset.
        Question. What is your assessment of the status of the facilities
    and workforce in DOD depots, logistics centers, arsenals, and other
    elements of the organic industrial base?
        Answer. Our depots, logistics centers, and arsenals serve an
    important role as part of the overall DIB in maintaining military
    readiness. While I understand investments have been made to improve the
    facilities and workforce of the OIB, if confirmed, I will work with the
    ASD for Sustainment, who is responsible for the OIB, and the Services
    to formally assess the State of our OIB with a focus on ensuring the
    Department maintains the proper mix of capabilities to meet future
    warfighting needs while staying adaptable for future missions.
        Question. What role, if any, should the organic industrial base
    play in the sustainment of software in defense systems?
        Answer. The sustainment of software in defense systems is a
    combination of organic and commercial support. The OIB plays a role
    with software maintenance no different than weapon system maintenance
    in totality. Software maintenance is a function of DOD core depot
    capabilities and workload. Its involvement ensures long-term
    operational readiness and security through software maintenance and
    updates, cybersecurity, maintaining technical expertise, cost control
    and mission continuity. If confirmed, in partnership with the ASD for
    Sustainment who is responsible for the OIB, I would ensure that we have
    the spectrum of support necessary from the OIB for software
    sustainment.
        Question. What role should the organic industrial base play in the
    sustainment of dual use and commercial technologies used by DOD?
        Answer. I understand that the sustainment of fielded commercial
    technologies poses significant challenges for warfighter readiness and
    can be expensive because the commercial providers operate outside of
    our acquisition lifecycle on a proprietary basis which may increase the
    risk of vendor lock. Additionally, I understand that the cost for the
    sustainment of commercial technologies is not always programmed. If
    confirmed, I look forward to working with the ASD for Sustainment,
    Director of the Defense Innovation Unit, the military Departments, and
    other stakeholders to tackle the challenges associated with the
    sustainment of commercial technologies to ensure the warfighter has
    interoperable tools they need to complete the mission.
        Question. What role, if any, does ASD(IBP) have in ensuring that
    the facilities and equipment at the military depots are modern,
    operable, and effective?
        Answer. As I understand it, the primary responsibility for ensuring
    that military depots are modern, operable, and effective falls to the
    ASD for Sustainment. If confirmed, it is a priority to maintain a close
    partnership with Sustainment to understand the optimal balance of
    organic and commercial capabilities necessary to maintain readiness.
        Question. What changes can be made to upgrade the indigenous
    production capability within the OIB to bring it forward from 1940's
    technology?
        Answer. I understand that our depots continue to evolve in their
    organic production capabilities, including the adoption of advanced
    manufacturing techniques and digital engineering, cyber-resilient
    systems, and innovations. I also understand that these measures
    modernize OIB capabilities and emphasize its cutting-edge nature to
    ensure its ability to meet the demands of modern defense operations.
        If confirmed, I will work closely with ASDthe for Sustainment to
    identify and address the depots' most pressing modernization needs.
    This includes advocating for necessary investments in advanced
    manufacturing technologies, infrastructure improvements, and workforce
    development initiatives to enhance their efficiency, responsiveness,
    and ability to support evolving warfighter requirements. This
    collaborative approach will ensure the OIB remains a strategic asset
    for long-term readiness.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to strengthen the
    Department's organic industrial base?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the ASD for Sustainment and
    other stakeholders to help assess the areas of greatest need and, where
    necessary, request resources to support the modernization and
    optimization of our OIB facilities and workforce, together with other
    key elements of our domestic defense industry. If confirmed, I will
    work with Sustainment to ensure that we have the right investment
    strategy to strengthen both our organic and commercial capabilities and
    that we have the best balance of those capabilities for the Department.
                     defense industrial base cybersecurity
        Question. What is your understanding of the challenges of enhancing
    cybersecurity of the DIB?
        Answer. My understanding is that enhancing the cybersecurity of the
    DIB presents a complex challenge, requiring a multi-pronged approach
    that addresses both immediate threats and long-term vulnerabilities.
    The chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and protecting systems
    across the defense supply chain from increasingly sophisticated
    cyberattacks is paramount. A key challenge lies in balancing the need
    for robust cybersecurity standards with the practical realities faced
    by small and medium-sized businesses, many of which lack the resources
    to implement comprehensive security measures. We must avoid a one-size-
    fits-all approach and instead tailor solutions to the specific needs
    and capabilities of different tiers of suppliers.
        If confirmed, I will collaborate with DOD Chief Information Officer
    (CIO), Congress, and other key stakeholders to conceive, develop, and
    implement scalable cybersecurity solutions for the DIB. This will
    include exploring options such as shared cybersecurity services, robust
    training and technical assistance tools, targeted funding assistance,
    and streamlined compliance frameworks that are achievable for
    businesses of all sizes. Leveraging existing programs and ensuring
    effective implementation while avoiding undue burdens on smaller
    companies, will be critical. Furthermore, if confirmed, I will focus on
    fostering stronger public-private partnerships to share threat
    intelligence, develop best practices, and promote a culture of
    cybersecurity awareness across the DIB.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you balance the needs of
    improving cybersecurity with the burden of compliance on small and
    medium sized businesses?
        Answer. I believe that balancing the critical need for improved DIB
    cybersecurity with the compliance burden on small and medium-sized
    businesses will be paramount to the success of the industrial base.
    However, we must achieve this without inadvertently creating barriers
    to entry or participation in the defense supply chain. If confirmed, my
    focus will be on developing and implementing solutions that are
    effective and scalable, yet still recognize the resource constraints
    faced by smaller companies.
        Implementation will involve leveraging existing DOD authorities and
    programs, such as the Defense Industrial Base Cybersecurity Program and
    Project Spectrum, to provide tailored guidance, tools, and financial
    and technical assistance specifically designed for smaller businesses.
    If confirmed, I will also explore innovative approaches such as
    incentivizing cybersecurity investments through preferential
    contracting mechanisms and promoting the adoption of industry-standard
    security practices that can be readily implemented by businesses of all
    sizes.
        If confirmed, my goal is to create a cybersecurity ecosystem where
    smaller companies are empowered and equipped to contribute to a secure
    and resilient DIB without being unduly burdened by compliance
    requirements. I believe this approach will foster a more diverse,
    innovative, and secure DIB.
        Question. In the last few years, the focus of the Acquisition &
    Sustainment model has been on one element of the framework: the
    Cybersecurity Maturity Model certification (CMMC).
        What is your understanding of the current State of CMMC and its
    impact on large, medium, and small businesses?
        Answer. My understanding is CMMC is vital for strengthening
    cybersecurity across the DIB, protecting sensitive information, and
    ensuring fair competition. While large businesses may have more
    resources, CMMC's complexities affect all sizes of businesses, with
    medium and small businesses facing significant cost and compliance
    challenges. The program aims to provide clarity and predictability,
    especially for the numerous small businesses in the DIB, using self-
    assessments and independent assessments. Effective CMMC implementation,
    including tailored support for small businesses, is crucial for
    strengthening the DIB and national security. I look forward to learning
    more if confirmed.
        Question. If confirmed, are there any changes you would make or
    recommend to the CMMC efforts beyond those already mandated by the
    previous program rule?
        Answer. If confirmed as ASD(IBP), I will prioritize strengthening
    DIB cybersecurity while minimizing burdens on smaller businesses.
    Although changes made in CMMC from initial framing to the final rule
    are positive steps, further improvements may still be needed. Beyond
    existing mandates, I will work with the CIO to explore streamlining
    compliance processes through a risk-based approach, expanding access to
    cost-effective cybersecurity solutions, increasing funding assistance
    for smaller businesses, and fostering greater collaboration across
    government, industry, and academia to develop and deploy innovative
    cybersecurity technologies. My goal is a robust cybersecurity ecosystem
    that strengthens the DIB without stifling smaller suppliers.
                                microelectronics
        Question. Over the last few decades, Taiwan, South Korea, and the
    People's Republic of China have implemented large-scale national
    industrial policies to build microelectronics manufacturing facilities.
    In contrast, the availability of large-scale state-of-the-art
    microelectronics manufacturing foundries in the United States has been
    steadily declining. DOD has a diverse set of requirements and needs for
    the domestic production of measurably secure state-of-the-art, State of
    the practice, and legacy integrated circuits in low volumes to meet its
    needs.
        What is your assessment of the Department's microelectronics needs,
    to include both legacy, state-of-the-practice, and state-of-the-art?
        Answer. Assured access to both legacy and cutting-edge
    microelectronics is critical for maintaining existing and developing
    future defense systems. The Department's microelectronics needs are
    complex and multifaceted, requiring a strategic approach that addresses
    the full spectrum of legacy systems, state-of-the-practice
    technologies, and state-of-the-art advancements, all while prioritizing
    security and trustworthiness. If confirmed, I will aim for secure and
    reliable domestic and allied sources for these components. I am
    committed to working across the government to develop a comprehensive
    microelectronics strategy. This will include close collaboration with
    Under Secretary of Defense for Research & Engineering (USD(R&E)) to
    anticipate and meet evolving technological requirements for national
    security.
        Question. In your view, what role should the Department play in
    working with the interagency and industry to increase domestic
    production of dual use microelectronics?
        Answer. Increasing domestic production of dual-use microelectronics
    demands a robust, whole-of-government approach, working in close
    partnership with industry. If confirmed, I will prioritize interagency
    coordination to ensure a cohesive and comprehensive strategy,
    leveraging existing authorities and exploring new avenues to
    incentivize domestic microelectronics production.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you plan to take to
    support increased domestic production of dual use microelectronics?
        Answer. If confirmed, increasing domestic production of dual-use
    microelectronics will be a priority. I will seek to leverage existing
    authorities, such as DPA Title III or IBAS, to incentivize private
    sector investment in dual-use manufacturing, ensuring national security
    needs are integrated into broader industrial policy. I will work across
    the Department through existing microelectronics governance structures
    to ensure our warfighters have the access they need to critical
    microelectronics. Congress, and the USD(R&E) have an important role to
    play to ensure we have an effective strategy for sourcing
    microelectronics.
        Question. What actions would you take to partner with the USD(R&E)
    on this issue?
        Answer. Collaboration within the DOD and across the executive
    branch is essential for supporting the DIB. If confirmed, I will work
    closely with USD(R&E) to ensure we have the workforce and capacity to
    address current and future microelectronics requirements, including
    innovative production initiatives.
                                 small business
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to increase the
    participation of small businesses in the defense industrial base?
        Answer. Small businesses are vital to the DIB and drive innovation.
    If confirmed, I commit to increasing their participation through
    enhanced outreach, especially to new entrants, and successful
    leveraging of the Department's small business programs. This includes
    ensuring effective market research by the acquisition workforce to
    maximize small business participation and improving communication of
    upcoming procurement opportunities. If confirmed, I will work across
    the Department and the Services to integrate these efforts with other
    small business initiatives.
        Question. In your view, what are the biggest barriers that prevent
    small businesses from becoming prime contractors to the Department?
        Answer. One of the biggest barriers, in my view, is the complexity
    of the acquisition process itself--particularly for companies that have
    not previously done business with the government. Navigating defense
    procurement can be overwhelming, especially for small firms that lack
    dedicated compliance or contracting teams.
        If confirmed, I will work closely with the DOD Office of Small
    Business Programs (OSBP) to reduce administrative burdens and help make
    the Department a more reliable and attractive customer--fully aligned
    with President Trump and Secretary Hegseth's direction to streamline
    defense acquisition and unleash the power of the American industrial
    base.
        Question. In your view, are their adequate authorities and
    incentives in place that offer small businesses an opportunity to
    transition from small to medium-sized businesses?
        Answer. I would assess whether existing authorities and incentives
    adequately facilitate their growth into medium-sized businesses. This
    includes examining potential gaps and areas for improvement to ensure a
    robust and dynamic DIB.
        Question. Do you believe the Department is using all available
    authorities to provide small businesses the opportunity to subcontract
    with existing prime contractors to ensure programs of record have
    access to the most advanced and effective technologies?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would assess the Department's effectiveness
    in using existing authorities to create subcontracting opportunities
    for small businesses. I understand programs like the Mentor-Protege
    Program, APEX Accelerators, and others aim to connect small firms with
    major defense programs. If confirmed, I would work with the OSBP to
    ensure these and other tools under its jurisdiction are fully leveraged
    to maximize the Department's access to advanced technologies and
    support small business participation in programs of record.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure that
    small businesses that provide goods and services to the Department of
    Defense are monitored and supported when facing financial pressures
    that challenge their viability?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with relevant stakeholders
    across the Department, including the OSBP, to enhance monitoring and
    support for small businesses facing financial pressures. This could
    include improved financial health assessments, early warning
    indicators, and streamlined access to resources and assistance
    programs. The goal is to proactively identify and mitigate risks to
    small business viability within the DIB.
        Question. What do you see as the benefits of diversifying the
    defense industrial base through more engagement with small and
    disadvantaged businesses?
        Answer. Diversifying the DIB through greater engagement with small
    and disadvantaged businesses enhances innovation, agility, and regional
    reach, enabling the Department to better meet demands and surge
    requirements. It also strengthens our economic deterrent by
    demonstrating the ability to mobilize the full breadth of American
    industry in support of national security.
        Question. What recommendations would you have to improve the
    Department's use of the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)
    program and the Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) program to
    develop and field new, advanced capabilities?
        Answer. The SBIR program is crucial for developing advanced
    capabilities, but transitioning technologies into fielded systems
    remains a challenge. If confirmed, I would work closely with Office of
    the USD(R&E) to improve this process by strengthening collaboration
    between SBIR program managers, acquisition professionals, and
    warfighters; developing streamlined transition pathways, potentially
    through dedicated funding, tailored acquisition strategies, and
    leveraging of relevant A&S programs; and implementing metrics to track
    success and integrating SBIR/STTR with other small business
    initiatives. This will maximize SBIR's impact and deliver cutting-edge
    capabilities to the warfighter.
        Question. The Office of Small Business Programs has worked over
    several years to increase participation in the Department of Defense
    Mentor Protege Program to expand the number of small businesses in the
    defense industrial base. If confirmed, how will you continue to expand
    the participation of small businesses in the DOD Mentor-Protege
    Program?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with the OSBP to explore
    opportunities for expanding small business participation and
    participation within agencies across the Department in the DOD Mentor-
    Protege Program. This includes examining potential program adjustments,
    incentives, and outreach efforts to encourage greater participation and
    ensure its continued effectiveness in strengthening the DIB.
        Question. The DOD Office of Small Business Programs rebranded the
    Procurement Technical Assistance Centers (PTACs), as APEX Accelerators,
    and expanded them to provide broader assistance to small businesses
    looking to work with the Department. Some of the expanded offerings
    include cybersecurity assistance and foreign ownership, control, and
    influence guidance. This guidance is imperative for businesses who may
    not be familiar with working with the Department. If confirmed, how
    will you continue to support the offerings of the APEX Accelerators?
        Answer. The APEX Accelerators provide crucial support to businesses
    of all sizes seeking to work with DOD. If confirmed, I would seek
    opportunities to enhance their offerings, ensuring they remain a
    valuable resource for small businesses navigating the DIB.
        Question. Small businesses that receive awards from programs such
    as SBIR/STTR remain at risk from foreign adversarial capital. Often the
    intellectual property and government-sensitive information are targeted
    and stolen from these innovative small businesses. If confirmed, how
    would you support efforts for small businesses to understand and
    mitigate foreign ownership and control risks?
        Answer. Protecting small businesses, especially SBIR/STTR
    recipients, from adversarial capital is crucial. If confirmed, I would
    work with the USD(R&E) and other stakeholders to enhance support for
    small businesses in understanding and mitigating foreign ownership and
    control risks. This could include improved training, resources, and
    proactive threat assessments.
                  intellectual property/technical data rights
        Question. Do you believe that DOD has sufficiently implemented
    intellectual property (IP) best practices to ensure that the government
    has appropriate access to IP and technical data to give proper return
    on investments in Federal research and development (R&D), retain the
    ability to re-compete programs to control costs, and exercise better
    control over program sustainment costs?
        Answer. Rapid technological advancements necessitate a renewed
    focus on intellectual property. If confirmed, I would work with
    stakeholders to review and enhance DOD's IP best practices, ensuring
    they adequately address return on R&D investment, re-competition
    opportunities, and sustainment cost control. This will include
    examining early integration of IP considerations into planning and
    addressing long-term needs. The DOD should implement best practices to
    identify IP needs early in the acquisition process to ensure it is an
    evaluation factor in competitive awards.
        Question. Does the Department need a different approach to access
    to technical data when dealing with primarily commercial companies?
        Answer. The DOD needs to ensure procurement approaches attract new
    entrants, acquire the best available technology, and ensure effective
    implementation and sustainment enabled by access to technical data. If
    confirmed, I will partner with my colleagues in the Office of the ASD
    for Acquisition to review the current approaches to procuring and
    accessing technical data for commercial products.
        Question. In what circumstances should DOD pursue reverse
    engineering or reengineering of parts when access to technical data is
    not available?
        Answer. Reverse engineering or reengineering should be considered
    when access to technical data and accompanying license rights are
    unavailable and essential system sustainment is at risk. If confirmed,
    I would work closely with USD(A&S) and USD(R&E) to leverage existing
    authorities to streamline qualification of alternate suppliers and
    remove barriers to reverse engineering. This collaborative approach
    will improve readiness and reduce costs while strengthening the
    industrial base, aligning with Administration priorities of
    revitalizing the DIB and reforming acquisition processes.
                             defense production act
        Question. The Covid-19 pandemic and Russia's invasion of Ukraine
    saw the expanded use of Defense Production Act (DPA) authorities for
    the defense industrial base, and to support national emergencies and
    other contingencies.
        How would you use DPA authorities to support prioritization of
    Federal contracts and expand domestic production of key supply chain
    bottlenecks (ex. Microelectronics, batteries), if confirmed?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would seek to use DPA authorities
    strategically to address supply chain bottlenecks like microelectronics
    and batteries, as well as other parts, components and rare materials
    causing constraints in the DIB. This includes implementing DPA Title I
    Defense Priorities and Allocations System authorities delegated from
    the Department of Commerce to prioritize and allocate critical
    industrial resources necessary or appropriate for the national defense,
    expediting production schedules, manufacturing capacity, and delivery
    performance, ensuring that programs of the highest national urgency are
    receiving appropriate priority performance of contracts and orders by
    the DIB. This also includes using the full scope of the DPA, including
    leveraging Title III authorities (loans, loan guarantees, purchase
    commitments, and purchases) to incentivize domestic production of key
    materials and reduce reliance on foreign sources and expand domestic
    production. I would also integrate DPA authorities with other tools
    like public-private partnerships and R&D investments for a more
    holistic approach to strengthening critical supply chains, coordinating
    closely with interagency partners.
        Question. In your opinion, to what extent and how should DOD best
    utilize DPA Title III authorities for loan guarantees, purchase
    commitments, and grants and subsidies to expand domestic production in
    areas of strategic interest?
        Answer. In my opinion, DPA Title III authorities, including loan
    guarantees, purchase commitments, and grants/subsidies, represent
    valuable tools for expanding domestic production in areas of strategic
    interest to the DOD. However, their use should be strategic and
    targeted, based on a rigorous assessment of need and potential
    effectiveness. A one-size-fits-all approach is not appropriate.
        If confirmed, I will conduct a comprehensive review of DPA Title
    III authorities to ensure their alignment with the needs of the DIB and
    the efficient use of taxpayer dollars, as well as coordinate with
    legislators to ensure DPA Title III is positioned to make use of loans,
    loan guarantees, and purchase commitments to the maximum extent
    possible. This review will inform a framework for determining the most
    appropriate type of incentive for a given situation. For example,
    grants or contracts may be more effective for quickly addressing urgent
    needs or stimulating initial investment in emerging technologies, while
    loan guarantees may be better suited for sustaining long-term
    investments in critical infrastructure. My goal is to utilize these
    authorities judiciously, maximizing their impact while minimizing risk
    and ensuring a robust and resilient domestic DIB. This will involve
    close coordination with other Federal agencies and industry partners to
    leverage expertise and avoid duplication of effort.
        Question. Are there sectors or items you believe should see
    expanded use of DPA Title III authorities to support domestic
    production?
        Answer. Several sectors, such as critical minerals and
    shipbuilding, warrant immediate attention for potential expanded DPA
    Title III use due to their criticality and supply chain
    vulnerabilities, including microelectronics, critical minerals, and
    high-performance materials. If confirmed, I would assess these sectors
    to identify areas where DPA Title III authorities could bolster
    domestic production and resilience. This assessment will consider
    current and future needs, informing recommendations for resource
    prioritization and potential additional authorities.
        Question. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2024 expanded the definition of domestic source to include the United
    Kingdom and Australia, if there were no domestic sources available. In
    addition to recognizing that the AUKUS partnership is critical to joint
    capability development and interoperability, both the United Kingdom
    and Australia have been forward leaning on improving supply chain
    transparency for critical and strategic materials.
        If confirmed, will you commit to leveraging the Defense Production
    Act authority not only for necessary domestic sources, but also to
    utilize existing alliances and supply chains for the benefit of the
    defense industrial base and the warfighter?
        Answer. If confirmed, and to the extent the efforts are in line
    with Presidential action, I am committed to using the DPA
    strategically, both domestically and with allies like the U.K., Canada,
    and Australia. I will focus on operationalizing the expanded definition
    of ``domestic source'' to address critical supply chain needs. This
    includes exploring creative uses of Title III authorities, such as
    incentives and innovative financing, to bolster domestic production and
    strengthen partnerships for a resilient industrial base.
        Question. The National Technology and Industrial Base (NTIB) is
    codified in statute and is composed of the defense industrial bases of
    the United States, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United
    Kingdom. According to statute, the Department of Defense is required to
    have a national security strategy for the national technology and
    industrial base and is supposed to chair the National Defense
    Technology and Industrial Base Council. However, there are very few
    outcomes from these requirements.
        If confirmed, how will you utilize the National Technology and
    Industrial Base as an asset to continue expansion and investment in the
    defense industrial base? Are there any statutory adjustments that you
    would recommend that would allow NTIB to be more effective?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will leverage the NTIB to expand and
    strengthen the DIB by deepening information sharing, pursuing joint
    action with NTIB partners to address supply chain vulnerabilities, and
    prioritizing ``ally shoring'' and ``friend-shoring.'' I will also work
    to reduce barriers to integrating allied companies into the DIB,
    streamline regulations, and improve reciprocal defense trade. This
    whole-of-government approach will strengthen collective defense
    production and ensure supply chain resilience, crucial for modernizing
    our technological base and enhancing deterrence.
                   international armaments cooperation (iac)
        Question. The Department conducts a number of activities that
    support International Armaments Cooperation (IAC) to promote US
    strategic goals. IAC is defined as (1) cooperative research,
    development, test, and evaluation of defense technologies, systems, or
    equipment; (2) joint production and follow-on support of defense
    articles or equipment and; (3) procurement of foreign technology,
    equipment, systems or logistics support. In addition to activities like
    information exchange agreements, defense trade, and cooperative
    logistics, the Department also funds activities that can be used to
    promote interoperability and joint development, such as the Defense
    Exportability Features (DEF) program, Coalition Warfare Support
    Program, and Foreign Comparative Test Program.
        In your view, how are international armaments cooperation
    activities used to shape and support broader DOD warfighting needs and
    priorities? Are there new approaches or activities we should consider
    to be more effective and strategic?
        Answer. IAC strengthens alliances, improves interoperability, and
    fosters innovation, all crucial for supporting DOD warfighting needs.
    If confirmed, I would examine streamlining acquisition with key
    partners, focusing on co-development, co-production, and co-sustainment
    of critical capabilities to maintain technological advantage, while
    ensuring these partnerships enhance U.S. industrial competitiveness and
    security. This includes exploring new approaches like joint investments
    in emerging technologies, flexible production, and enhanced information
    sharing.
        Question. Based on the work of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group,
    what recommendations would you draw from its success to help streamline
    and improve security cooperation, foreign military sales, and
    cooperative logistics processes in order to be more responsive to
    rapidly changing security situations?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would draw upon valuable lessons out of the
    Ukraine Defense Contact Group (UDCG) to advocate for streamlined
    processes for expediting security assistance requests, enhanced
    interoperability of equipment and systems among partner nations, pre-
    positioning of critical supplies and equipment in strategic locations,
    maintaining an industrial base that can expand to meet emergent
    requirements during a conflict, and improved coordination mechanisms
    for joint planning and logistics. These improvements would enable more
    agile and effective responses to rapidly changing security situations
    while strengthening partnerships, interoperability, and
    interchangeability--ultimately ensuring our collective security.
        Question. The Ukraine Defense Contact Group offers valuable lessons
    in security cooperation. If confirmed, I would closely examine its
    successes and challenges to inform future decisionmaking regarding
    streamlining foreign military sales, cooperative logistics, and
    responsiveness to evolving security situations. This includes exploring
    opportunities to expedite assistance requests, enhance
    interoperability, pre-position critical supplies, and improve joint
    planning and logistics coordination.
        If confirmed, would you review how the U.S. could rapidly model the
    Ukraine Defense Contact Group in the event of a different conflict?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would review the lessons learned from the
    Ukraine conflict, including the effectiveness of the UDCG, to inform
    future contingency planning, particularly in the Indo-Pacific region.
    Examining best practices and areas for improvement in coordinating
    multinational support for growing our collective DIBs is crucial for
    ensuring we can respond rapidly and effectively to any future conflict.
        Question. In your view, how are newer initiatives like the Defense
    Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI) with India, the Quadrilateral
    Security Dialogue (or Quad), or the AUKUS initiative being used to
    support our defense posture, and are there recommendations for
    improvements of those activities that should be considered to make them
    more effective?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the DTTI, the Quad, and AUKUS
    are vital for strengthening our defense posture through
    interoperability, technology cooperation, and collective security.
    However, maximizing their effectiveness requires prioritizing expedited
    technology sharing, co-development, co-production, and co-sustainment
    that is focused on interoperability, strengthened industrial base
    collaboration, and regular strategic dialog.
        If confirmed, I will review these initiatives to ensure they are
    impactful partnerships that enhance our collective defense capabilities
    and shared security.
                            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 Dan Sullivan
                                 8(a) contracts
        1. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Cadenazzi, the Small Business Act (SBA)
    8(a) program, created by Congress, provides a contract vehicle through
    which sole source and set aside contracts can be awarded to small
    businesses owned by Alaska Native corporations, Community Development
    Corporations, Indian tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations. These
    corporations are tied to political relationships, not racial
    classifications. They also are some of our most efficient contractors,
    earning stellar Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System
    (CPARS) marks. Last many of these small businesses employ veterans at
    rates far exceeding the national average, allowing our Nation's finest
    to continue to serve after they take off the uniform. Will you commit
    to me to work to preserve and strengthen 8(a) contracting for the
    Department of the Defense?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. It is my understanding that 8(a) companies are an
    invaluable asset to the Department's workforce. If confirmed, I will
    commit to preserve and strengthen 8(a) contracting in the Department.

        2. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Cadenazzi and Vice Admiral Pappano, I
    recently toured an SBA 8(a) contracting operation and saw firsthand the
    value 8(a) brings to the Federal customer in terms of cost and
    efficiency while delivering mission-critical solutions that increase
    our national security and warfighter readiness. 8(a) contracts
    represent the best ``bang for the buck'' for taxpayers, giving
    contracting officers additional flexibility while also maximizing
    efficiency by reducing red-tape. Do you see the value in increased
    efficiency in flexibility brought from initiatives such as the 8(a)
    program?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. In my view, the 8(a) program delivers substantial
    value to the Department of Defense by connecting innovative small
    businesses with prime contractors. This infusion of speed and
    innovation strengthens the defense industrial base, resulting in
    effective outcomes for the Department.
                                     alaska
        3. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Cadenazzi, on President Trump's first day
    in office he signed the Executive Order ``Unleashing Alaska's
    Extraordinary Resource Potential.'' This sent a strong message to
    Alaska, America, and the world, that unleashing Alaska's extraordinary
    resources and jobs in a growing economy is one of his Administration's
    top priorities. For years, I've worked toward the success of the Alaska
    LNG project. Not only could Alaska LNG shipments provide our allies
    with energy security, reaching them in 6 days without any strategic
    choke points, but this pipeline crosses directly through some of our
    most prominent military bases in my State, several of which have had
    issues with supply. Now, purchase agreements and other ways to commit
    to the project, beyond just the Department of Defense's (DOD) immediate
    need, will help secure financing for the project quickly and at the
    lowest cost in line with President Trump's America First Energy and
    National Security agenda. Can I get your commitment to work with me on
    the Alaska LNG (AKLNG) Project?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I appreciate your longstanding commitment to the
    Alaska LNG project and its potential benefits for both Alaska and our
    national security. I understand the importance of this project for
    energy security, job creation, and supporting our military
    installations in Alaska. If confirmed, I will commit to working with
    you to explore this project's opportunities for the DOD and nation.
                  defense production act and critical minerals
        4. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Cadenazzi, Alaska represents a wealth of
    critical minerals. In the 2025 National Defense Authorization Act
    (NDAA), the Secretary of Defense was tasked with providing a way
    forward to address all critical mineral shortfalls. This came after a
    2024 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report found that of the 99
    materials for which there is a current shortfall, over 90 percent had
    either zero or one domestic supplier. In 2024, the previous
    Administration went to Australia and the United Kingdom and offered to
    purchase minerals from there rather than source them domestically. So,
    in 2024, I got an amendment into the NDAA that said that domestic
    sources, namely the United States and Canada, would be the primary
    source of development, and then, only if unable to source domestically,
    then we could go to those other countries. What are the risks to
    continued reliance on foreign, and often un-friendly, sources for these
    critical minerals?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. It is my understanding that addressing our reliance
    on foreign sources of critical minerals is not just an industrial base
    issue, it is one of national security. Reliance on foreign sources for
    critical minerals exposes the U.S. defense industrial base to supply
    chain disruptions and adversarial manipulation, jeopardizing our
    ability to produce essential defense systems and maintain technological
    superiority.

        5. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Cadenazzi, how can Congress help
    ``onshore'' or, at the very least, ``friendly shore'' some of these
    material sources?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. It is in my view that Congress can bolster domestic
    critical mineral production by providing predictable and stable
    resources for infrastructure, R&D, and workforce development that
    supports the onshoring of these materials.

        6. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Cadenazzi, I also got a provision in the
    2025 NDAA that required the Secretary of Defense to consult with the
    head of any agency responsible for development of an ``environmental
    document'' for a project that would result in an increase in
    availability of strategic and critical minerals. These environmental
    impact studies have been weaponized against my State to block
    development and limit economic opportunity at a cost to our national
    security. Will you commit to me to ensuring the Defense Production Act
    stays focused on defense and on improving our domestic industrial base?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed, I will commit to leveraging the
    Defense Production Act to secure reliable domestic sources of critical
    minerals and defense-critical capabilities that will strengthen our
    defense industrial base and reduce reliance on vulnerable foreign
    supply chains.
                      protecting the u.s. industrial base
        7. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Cadenazzi, the United States defense
    industrial base has always been a major target for foreign espionage--
    especially by major adversaries like China and Russia. One concerning
    trend the last few years is the very real threat of sabotage of
    industrial base assets by foreign agents. We saw attempts attributed to
    Russia to sabotage critical defense industrial base infrastructure in
    NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization] countries since 2022. Germany
    and the United Kingdom for instance both saw fires and explosions break
    out at ammunition and missile facilities linked to the War in Ukraine.
    We saw an assassination plot against the CEO of Rheinmettal, a major
    German arms supplier, and fires set by explosive devices that went off
    at DHL logistics hubs in Germany, England, and Poland bound for
    aircraft. If confirmed, will you commit to doing an assessment of the
    security of the U.S. defense industrial base against the types of plots
    I just described and report back to Congress as soon as possible about
    ways we could better protect these critical nodes?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed, I look forward to working with the
    relevant interagency partners and Congress to assess the security of
    the U.S. defense industrial base and explore ways to enhance its
    protection. I understand the importance of this issue and commit to
    giving it full and careful consideration.
                           collaboration with israel
        8. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Cadenazzi, the Department of Defense's
    2023 National Defense Industrial Strategy, as well as the DOD's
    implementation plan for fiscal year 2025, emphasize the importance of
    collaboration with allies and partners to enhance defense production,
    innovation, and overall capability. Israel, with its robust and
    innovative defense industry, is a natural fit for inclusion in the
    National Technology and Industrial Base (NTIB). Israel's defense
    sector, which emerged out of necessity, has become a leader in cutting-
    edge technologies such as cybersecurity, unmanned systems, and missile
    defense. The United States and Israel already have a strong foundation
    of cooperation through the Security of Supply Arrangement (SOSA) and
    the U.S.-Israel Defense Industrial Base Working Group. With rising
    threats from adversaries like China, Russia, and Iran, do you believe
    it is in the United States' national interest to deepen our industrial
    collaboration with Israel?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed, I look forward to examining the
    potential benefits and challenges of deepening defense industrial
    cooperation collaboration with Israel, particularly in light of
    evolving geopolitical dynamics. I recognize the importance of strong
    international partnerships to our national security and economic
    interests.
                                   __________
                 Questions Submitted by Senator Jeanne Shaheen
                          electronics industrial base
        9. Senator Shaheen. Mr. Cadenazzi, what specific actions will your
    office take to identify and close manufacturing shortfalls in essential
    electronic components such as printed circuit boards (PCBs) and flat
    panel displays to ensure a resilient and secure industrial base for
    advanced defense electronics?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed, my office will work to assess supply
    chain risks and explore opportunities to strengthen domestic production
    through targeted investments and strategic partnerships. We will work
    to evaluate ways to address manufacturing gaps in PCBs and flat panel
    displays while supporting efforts to diversify supply sources.

        10. Senator Shaheen. Mr. Cadenazzi, how can your office rapidly
    ramp up domestic capacity for crucial electronic needs, like PCBs, so
    that the United States can match the output of our adversaries?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed, I look forward to thoroughly assessing
    our domestic capacity for crucial electronics like PCBs and developing
    a comprehensive plan to leverage all available tools, including the
    Defense Production Act, Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment (IBAS)
    Program and other authorities.
                                   __________
                 Questions Submitted by Senator Mazie K. Hirono
                             industrial resilience
        11. Senator Hirono. Mr. Cadenazzi, the United States faces a pacing
    threat from China, and we must ensure that our industrial policy
    accounts for forward-deployed capabilities, long supply lines, and the
    need for distributed manufacturing. Hawaii, in particular, offers a
    strategic location for investment in resilient infrastructure and
    sustainment. What specific role do you see forward-positioned
    industrial capabilities--such as those in Hawaii or Guam--playing in
    future contingency planning and sustainment operations in the Indo-
    Pacific?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Forward-positioned industrial capabilities in
    locations like Hawaii and Guam are absolutely crucial for future
    contingency planning and sustainment operations in the Indo-Pacific.
    They provide essential logistical support, reduce reliance on long and
    vulnerable supply lines, and enhance our ability to respond quickly and
    effectively to crises. If confirmed, I would prioritize investing in
    and strengthening these forward-positioned capabilities as a key
    element of our Indo-Pacific strategy.

        12. Senator Hirono. Mr. Cadenazzi, how will you work to ensure that
    industrial base initiatives don't just concentrate on major defense
    primes, but also include small businesses and community-based partners,
    particularly in underserved regions like Hawaii?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I recognize the vital role that small businesses
    play in our national security innovation and industrial base
    resilience. They possess agility and specialized expertise and often
    represent the leading edge of technological advancement. It is
    essential that we leverage these strengths and ensure they are not lost
    or forgotten in relation to the larger defense primes.
        If confirmed, I will direct IBP's industrial base initiatives to
    prioritize engagement with these businesses and communities to
    understand their capabilities and tailor DOD support to their needs.
    This will involve streamlining acquisition processes, investing in
    workforce development, and increasing transparency in contracting.
         native hawaiian organizations and the defense industrial base
        13. Senator Hirono. Mr. Cadenazzi, I've long believed that
    sustaining and strengthening the defense industrial base is not just
    about procurement, it's about people, places, and partnerships. Hawaii
    is uniquely positioned to contribute to the resilience and
    modernization of the defense industrial base, led by local and Native
    Hawaiian Organizations. How will you ensure that small and
    underrepresented communities, including Native Hawaiian Organizations,
    are more fully integrated into the DOD's industrial base planning and
    investment strategy?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I agree that a robust defense industrial base relies
    on people, places, and partnerships, and I share your view that Hawaii
    offers unique capabilities and contributions. It's not simply about
    procuring equipment--but more so about cultivating a diverse and
    resilient ecosystem of suppliers, innovators, manufacturers, and
    vocationally skilled workers.
        If confirmed, I will leverage existing authorities and small
    business programs, such as the DOD Mentor-Protege and APEX Accelerator
    Programs, and as well as existing close partnerships with the Hawaiian
    small business and defense industrial organizations through INDOPACOM
    and the Defense Innovation Unit. I will also explore new mechanisms to
    lower barriers to entry, encourage prime-contractor partnerships, and
    invest in workforce development specific to these communities.

        14. Senator Hirono. Mr. Cadenazzi, how do you plan to both
    strengthen our supply chain resilience and ensure that communities like
    those in Hawaii--which have historically been underutilized--are
    included in the defense innovation ecosystem?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. In my view, strengthening supply chain resilience
    and ensuring inclusivity of underutilized suppliers are mutually
    reinforcing goals. If confirmed, I will prioritize proactive outreach
    to Hawaiian businesses, especially Native Hawaiian Organizations,
    leverage existing IBP programs to attract suppliers from underutilized
    communities, and tailor DOD support through streamlined acquisition
    (e.g., expanded OTAs), incentives for prime-contractor partnerships,
    and targeted workforce development. This inclusive approach will
    leverage local potential, driving innovation and strengthening defense
    supply chains. If confirmed, I am committed to visiting Hawaii to
    gather stakeholder input and inform future efforts.
                               acquisition reform
        15. Senator Hirono. Mr. Cadenazzi, there is bipartisan support for
    acquisition reform, especially reforms that are meaningful for our
    warfighters in the Indo-Pacific--the Department's priority theater. But
    for too long, we've seen a mismatch between our strategic objectives
    and how we fund and prioritize capabilities for the region. How will
    you ensure that industrial base planning is aligned with real-world
    requirements?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Aligning industrial base planning with Indo-Pacific
    needs would be crucial. If confirmed, I will prioritize collaboration
    with U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (USINDOPACOM) to define requirements,
    leverage data analysis to address vulnerabilities, promote agile
    acquisition from our defense industry partners for faster delivery, and
    ensure transparency and accountability throughout the process. This
    data-driven approach will deliver warfighters the capabilities they
    need.

        16. Senator Hirono. Mr. Cadenazzi, do you support the creation of a
    dedicated U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) Acquisition Executive
    to represent the region's need; and how do you see your office
    coordinating with that role, if established?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. It is important to ensure the USINDOPACOM has the
    necessary acquisition leadership to support the region's strategic
    needs. I would welcome the opportunity to better understand the role of
    a dedicated USINDOPACOM Acquisition Executive.

        17. Senator Hirono. Mr. Cadenazzi, would you support reforms to
    give combatant commanders more direct input into acquisition and
    industrial base decisions?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I understand OSD has been increasing delegation of
    authority to requirements owners, wherever possible, to reduce
    administrative burden associated with multiple layers of bureaucratic
    oversight. If confirmed, I will work closely with my colleagues
    throughout A&S and partners such as the Office of the Secretary of
    Defense for Research and Engineering and Defense Innovation Unit to
    identify opportunities where combatant commanders may provide more
    direct input into acquisition and industrial base decisions.

        18. Senator Hirono. Mr. Cadenazzi, reforming acquisition practices
    to better support our forward-deployed forces is essential to ensuring
    deterrence and readiness in the Indo-Pacific. Yet in the fiscal year
    2025 budget, INDOPACOM submitted over $11 billion in unfunded
    priorities--a clear signal that our current acquisition systems aren't
    keeping pace with operational demands in the region. How do you plan to
    tailor acquisition and sustainment strategies to meet the unique needs
    of Indo-Pacific forces--particularly those based in Hawaii and
    operating throughout the Pacific Island chains?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed, I will work closely with my colleagues
    throughout A&S to best understand the requirements unique to each
    combatant command and will support acquisition reform efforts to meet
    the operational needs of the warfighter.

        19. Senator Hirono. Mr. Cadenazzi, in light of the urgency to field
    capabilities quickly while maintaining transparency and accountability,
    what specific acquisition reforms would you advocate for to ensure the
    timely delivery of systems without compromising oversight or wasting
    taxpayer dollars?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed, I will work closely with my colleagues
    throughout A&S to support acquisition reform efforts to enable faster
    procurement, production, and to ensure innovative capabilities are
    delivered into the hands of the warfighter. As such, if confirmed I
    welcome the opportunity to partner my A&S colleagues on reform efforts
    to fulfill the President's objective of restoring common sense to
    Federal procurement.
                        unmanned systems sustainability
        20. Senator Hirono. Mr. Cadenazzi, DOD is rapidly expanding its use
    of autonomous and unmanned systems across all domains, especially in
    the Indo-Pacific. But many of these systems are not designed for
    sustainability, lifecycle logistics, or rapid reconstitution in
    theater. How do you see your office helping shape procurement and
    production strategies for autonomous systems to ensure they are
    scalable, sustainable, and field-ready for operational needs in
    contested environments like the Indo-Pacific?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Secretary Hegseth acknowledged the importance of
    autonomous and unmanned systems across all domains. Additionally, I
    understand there are many stakeholders within the Department focused on
    delivering these capabilities at speed and scale to the warfighters. It
    is critical the Department assess the needs within all domains,
    including the Indo-Pacific when procuring autonomous and unmanned
    systems. If confirmed, I will assist the appropriate stakeholders
    across the Department identify the best strategies to deliver
    warfighters scalable, sustainable, and field-ready autonomous and
    unmanned systems.
                                   __________
                Questions Submitted by Senator Elizabeth Warren
                                     ethics
        21. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit not to seek any employment with or compensation from a defense
    contractor, including through serving on a board, as a consultant, or
    as a lobbyist, for 4 years after leaving DOD?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I will abide by the extensive post-government
    employment ethics rules required by Federal law. These provisions set
    forth comprehensive restrictions relating to acceptance of compensation
    from defense contractors, as well as communicating back to the Federal
    Government on behalf of any future employers and clients. I believe
    that these existing rules are appropriate and sufficient to protect the
    public interest. If confirmed, I will carry out the responsibilities of
    my office honorably, and I will seek any post-government employment in
    full compliance with the applicable ethics rules.

        22. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit not to engage in any lobbying activities, including unregistered
    ``shadow'' or ``behind-the-scenes'' lobbying under the guise of
    consulting or advising, focused on DOD or any of its components for 4
    years after leaving DOD?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I will abide by the extensive post-government
    employment ethics rules required by Federal law. These provisions set
    forth comprehensive restrictions relating to acceptance of compensation
    from defense contractors, as well as communicating back to the Federal
    Government on behalf of any future employers and clients. I believe
    that these existing rules are appropriate and sufficient to protect the
    public interest. If confirmed, I will carry out the responsibilities of
    my office honorably, and I will seek any post-government employment in
    full compliance with the applicable ethics rules.

        23. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, will you commit not to seek
    employment, board membership with, or any other form of compensation
    from a company that you regulated or otherwise interacted with while in
    government, for at least 4 years after leaving office?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I will abide by the extensive post-government
    employment ethics rules required by Federal law. These provisions set
    forth comprehensive restrictions relating to acceptance of compensation
    from defense contractors, as well as communicating back to the Federal
    Government on behalf of any future employers and clients. I believe
    that these existing rules are appropriate and sufficient to protect the
    public interest. If confirmed, I will carry out the responsibilities of
    my office honorably, and I will seek any post-government employment in
    full compliance with the applicable ethics rules.

        24. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, during your nomination process,
    did anyone on the Trump campaign, transition team, or other closely
    related entity approach you about your loyalty to President Trump?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No. I was not approached regarding this subject.

        25. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, if you were approached about
    your loyalty to President Trump, did you sign a loyalty pledge or other
    similar oath? If so, please provide a copy of the text of that pledge
    or oath.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No. I was not approached regarding this subject.

        26. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, if you were approached about
    your loyalty to President Trump, did you make any verbal
    representations of loyalty? If so, please describe this representation.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No. I was not approached regarding this subject.

        27. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, in November 2024, the New York
    Times and other news outlets reported that Boris Epshteyn, a top
    adviser to President Trump, allegedly requested payment from
    prospective political appointees to promote their candidacies for top
    positions within the Administration. Did you discuss the possibility of
    joining the Administration with Mr. Epshteyn at any time?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No.

        28. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, if you did discuss the
    possibility of joining the Administration with Mr. Epshteyn, did Mr.
    Epshteyn seek payment from you for promoting your candidacy for a
    position within the Administration?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Not applicable.

        29. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, at any time, did lawyers for
    President Trump or members of President Trump's team approach you
    regarding Mr. Epshteyn and the allegations cited above? If so, please
    describe the information that they provided you (including copies of
    documents), what was discussed during any calls, and any other
    information pertaining to this interaction.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No, I was not approached on this subject.

        30. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, were you in contact with Mr.
    Elon Musk at any time during your nomination process? If so, please
    describe the nature of those contacts.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No, I was not in contact with Mr. Musk at any time
    during the nomination process.

        31. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, was Mr. Musk present or involved
    in any interviews you did related to your nomination? If so, please
    describe the nature of his involvement.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No, he was not present or involved in any interviews
    related to my nomination.

        32. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, was Mr. Musk involved in any way
    with your nomination, including but not limited to, directly or
    indirectly contacting Senators regarding their position on your
    nomination?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No, he was not involved in any way with my
    nomination process.

        33. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, who was in the room or
    participated in any of your interviews regarding your nomination?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I had three discussions with Administration
    personnel and staff from PPO and DOD prior to my nomination. None of
    these were defined to me as ``interviews.''

        34. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, if you own any stock or hold any
    other interest in any defense industry or Department of Energy
    contractors, will you divest it to avoid even the appearance of a
    conflict of interest?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. My ethics agreement, which was previously provided
    to the Committee, sets forth my ethics commitments, if confirmed.

        35. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, what do you consider the role of
    the press in a democracy?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. An objective, apolitical press is intended to
    provide factual reporting on events in the Nation and the world while
    delivering a level of accountability on corporations, governments and
    their officials of any and all political parties operating at any level
    (from the Federal to State and local).

        36. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, do you think it would be an
    appropriate use of taxpayer resources to ``dig up dirt'' on journalists
    who investigate or criticize you, your office, or the Trump
    administration?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No.

        37. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, will you commit not to
    retaliate, including by denying access to government officials or
    facilities, against news outlets or individual journalists who publish
    articles that are critical of you, your office, your agency, or the
    Trump administration?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes, with the bounds of the law and guidance from
    legal counsel.

        38. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, have you requested, or has
    anyone requested on your behalf, that any other person or third party
    sign a nondisclosure, confidentiality, non-disparagement, or similar
    agreement regarding your conduct in a personal or professional
    capacity?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No.

        39. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, will you voluntarily release any
    individual from any such agreements before this committee votes on your
    nomination?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Not applicable.

        40. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, have you ever paid or promised
    to pay, or has anyone paid or promised to pay on your behalf, an
    individual as part of any non-disclosure, confidentiality, non-
    disparagement, or similar agreement?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No.

        41. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi if the answer to the previous
    question was yes, how much was promised, how much was paid, and what
    were the circumstances?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Not applicable.

        42. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, will you commit to recuse
    yourself from all particular matters involving your former clients and
    employers for the duration of your service at DOD?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. My ethics agreement, which was previously provided
    to the Committee, sets forth my ethics commitments, if confirmed.
                    congressional oversight and transparency
        43. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, what is your understanding of
    the role of the Department of Defense Inspector General and service
    Inspectors General?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. The Inspector General operates with the DOD and
    Services as independent entities which conduct independent unbiased
    investigation and analysis of a broad array of topic to maintain
    accountability within the Department.

        44. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, will you ensure your staff
    complies with any Inspector General deadlines established for requested
    communications, documents, and witnesses, and that staff will be
    protected from reprisal for their testimony?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes.

        45. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, if you are not able to comply
    with any Inspector General requests and deadlines, will you notify the
    Republican and Democratic members of this committee regarding the basis
    for any good faith delay or denial?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes

        46. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit to refusing to follow illegal orders from any individual,
    including the President?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes.

        47. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, what actions would you take if
    you were given an illegal order from any individual, including the
    President?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If I had concerns about the legality of an order, I
    would first contact the Office of Legal Counsel to address my concerns.
    Based upon their response, I would take appropriate actions.

        48. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, will you commit to voluntarily
    provide a deposition if you are requested by Congress to provide one?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes

        49. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, will you commit to voluntarily
    testify in front of Congress if you are requested by Congress to do so?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes

        50. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, will you commit to testify or
    provide a deposition in front of Congress if you are issued a subpoena
    to do so?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes

        51. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, will you commit to providing
    information or documents to Congress voluntarily if you are requested
    to do so?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes

        52. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, will you provide information or
    documents to Congress if you are issued a subpoena to do so?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes

        53. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, will you commit to following
    current precedent for responding to information requests, briefings,
    and other inquiries from Congress, including the Senate and House Armed
    Services Committees and their minority members?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes

        54. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, if confirmed, will you commit to
    posting your official calendar monthly?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed, I commit to complying with the Freedom
    of Information Act, which covers all agency records to include my
    official calendar.

        55. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, do you think the Federal
    Government has an overclassification problem? If so, please provide
    examples of overclassification you have encountered.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I do not have current personal experience with this
    issue. However, I have read in public reports and heard from both
    experts and government officials that the Federal Government has an
    overclassification problem. As result, I do not have a strong
    perspective on this topic and would be open to arguments on either
    side.

        56. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, if confirmed, do you think your
    department should pursue strategic technology to support automated
    declassification?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Technology can be a powerful enabler of productivity
    and efficiency for myriad administrative tasks. Where declassification
    is appropriate, the application of strategic technology could be a
    complement to existing declassification processes, serve as a check on
    manual declassification process, or serve as starting point for more
    advanced solutions in the future.
                                  project 2025
        57. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, have you discussed Project 2025
    with any officials associated with the Trump campaign, the Trump
    transition team, or other members of the Trump administration? If so,
    please explain what you discussed, when you discussed it, and with whom
    you discussed it.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No, I have never discussed Project 2025 with any
    members of the Trump campaign, Trump transition team or other members
    of the Trump administration.

        58. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, have you discussed Project 2025
    with any officials associated with the Heritage Foundation? If so,
    please explain what you discussed, when you discussed it, and with whom
    you discussed it.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No, I have never discussed Project 2025 with any
    officials associated with the Heritage Foundation.
                               foreign influence
        59. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, have you received any payment
    from a foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government
    within the past 5years?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No.

        60. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, have you communicated with any
    foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government within
    the past 5 years?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No.

        61. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, please disclose any
    communications or payments you have had with representatives of any
    foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government within
    the past 5 years and describe the nature of the communication.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No.
                   retaliation and protecting whistleblowers
        62. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, do you believe that
    servicemembers, civilians, grantees, and contractors should be
    protected from any form of retaliation for coming forward about an
    illegal order, sexual assault or harassment, negligence, misconduct, or
    any other concern that they wish to raise?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes.

        63. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, have you ever retaliated against
    any individual for coming forward about an illegal order, sexual
    assault or harassment, negligence, misconduct, or any other concern
    that they wish to raise?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No.

        64. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit to protecting whistleblowers? If so, please specify how you will
    do so.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes. I am not currently aware of DOD rules and
    regulations for whistleblower protection. I would need to familiarize
    myself with this topic to provide specific steps. In addition, I would
    seek advice from counsel and coordinate any actions or response with
    them.
                            impoundment control act
        65. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, do you believe the Secretary of
    Defense or the Secretary of Energy has the legal authority to block the
    disbursement of funds appropriated by Congress?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I fully acknowledge and respect Congress'
    constitutional role in appropriating funds to be carried out by the
    executive branch for designated purposes.

        66. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, what is your understanding of
    the Impoundment Control Act?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. My understanding is that the Impoundment Control Act
    provides a framework for handling circumstances in which the President
    seeks to defer or cancel execution of appropriated funds.
        I commit, if confirmed, to executing my responsibilities consistent
    with the Constitution and the law on this matter, as on all others. I
    would ensure that my actions and advice to the Secretary of Defense on
    this matter are informed by the Administration's legal positions and
    advice from the Department's General Counsel's office.

        67. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, do you commit to complying with
    the Impoundment Control Act?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law on this
    matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and advice to
    the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by the
    Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel's office.

        68. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, do you commit to notifying the
    Senate and House Armed Services Committees, including the majority and
    minority, if you are asked not to comply with the Impoundment Control
    Act or not to expend the money that Congress appropriates or
    authorizes?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law on this
    matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and advice to
    the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by advice the
    Administration's legal positions and from the Department's General
    Counsel's office.

        69. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, the Constitution's Spending
    Clause (Art. I, Sec.  8, cl. 1) and Appropriations Clause (Art. I,
    Sec.  9, cl. 7) give Congress, not the Executive, power of the purse.
    The Supreme Court has unanimously upheld this power. Do you believe
    that impoundments are constitutional?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law on this
    matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and advice to
    the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by the
    Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel's office.

        70. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, the funding levels in
    appropriations bills passed into law are not targets or ceilings;
    instead, they are amounts the executive branch must spend, unless
    stated otherwise. Congress could--if it wanted the President to have
    discretion--write those amounts as ceilings. Do you agree?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law on this
    matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and advice to
    the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by the
    Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel's office.

        71. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, what is your understanding of
    the requirements for DOD/NNSA to obligate funding that Congress
    authorizes and appropriates, in accordance with the time period that
    Congress deems it to do so?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law on this
    matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and advice to
    the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by the
    Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel's office.

        72. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, do you commit to expending the
    money that Congress appropriates and authorizes?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law on this
    matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and advice to
    the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by advice the
    Administration's legal positions and from the Department's General
    Counsel's office.

        73. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, do you commit to following and
    implementing every provision of the annual National Defense
    Authorization Act passed into law?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law,
    including the National Defense Authorization Acts.

        74. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, if you became aware of a
    potential violation of the Antideficiency Act, Impoundment Control Act,
    or other appropriations laws, what steps would you take?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law. If I
    receive information of a potential legal violation, I would direct the
    gathering of relevant facts, ensure all relevant stakeholders are
    engaged, and consult with the Department's General Counsel's office.
                                right-to-repair
        75. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, do you believe ensuring the
    services have access to the technical data rights needed to repair
    their own equipment could advance military readiness?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. The ability to quickly and cost-effectively repair,
    maintain, and overhaul equipment is essential to military readiness and
    deterrence. As such, I believe the Department should procure the
    necessary data and associated rights to enable repair of its own
    equipment where appropriate. If confirmed, I will work to support the
    Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and my
    counterparts across the Department to ensure there is a review of the
    Department's policies regarding the acquisition of technical data
    rights and the impact on readiness.

        76. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit to helping DOD lower sustainment costs by promoting competition
    for repair contracts and ensuring DOD has access to technical data
    rights needed for repairs?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed, I will work with my counterparts
    across Acquisition and Sustainment to explore how best to leverage
    right-to-repair and technical data rights in acquisition and
    sustainment contracts to lower costs, enhance competition, and foster
    innovation within the defense industrial base.

        77. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit to ensuring services and components have guidance and necessary
    support to include right-to-repair/technical data rights clauses in
    acquisition contracts that DOD enters into as part of a broader
    strategy to lower sustainment costs and expand the defense industrial
    base?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I note that Secretary Hegseth directed the Secretary
    of the Army to identify and propose contract modifications to
    incorporate right-to-repair provisions and seek to include these
    provisions in all new contracts to accelerate modernization and
    efficacy. If confirmed, I am committed to supporting Department policy
    on right-to-repair provisions as a tool to foster competition and
    innovation in the defense industrial base.

        78. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, what is your understanding of
    how DOD can use suspension and debarment to advance DOD acquisition and
    policy priorities?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. It's my understanding that suspension and debarment
    are tools for ensuring the defense industrial base is comprised of
    responsible and reliable contractors. If confirmed, I look forward to
    working with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition to
    better understand available DOD options, such as suspension and
    debarment, to ensure a robust DIB.

        79. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, will you commit to conducting an
    assessment of how acquisition strategies and contract mechanisms can be
    used to protect DOD's interest in acquisition and sustainment, the
    results of which you would make public for review by Congress, the
    public, and the Department of Government Efficiency?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed, I will commit to working with the
    Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, who has primary
    responsibility for this area, to support an assessment of acquisition
    strategies and contract mechanisms. I believe a thorough understanding
    of these tools is critical for protecting the DOD's interests in
    acquisition and sustainment.
                               acquisition reform
        80. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi and Vice Admiral Pappano, what is
    your understanding of the Procurement Integrity Act and your
    obligations under that law?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I understand I am obligated to protect source
    selection information from unauthorized disclosure and that
    safeguarding this sensitive information is essential to maintain the
    integrity of the process. As a Government official, I understand I must
    ensure all prospective contractors have the fair opportunity to compete
    for Federal contracts, and the Procurement Integrity Act prohibits
    former Government officials from accepting compensation from
    contractors to varying degrees, depending on the procurement
    decisionmaking role performed by the former official and the dollar
    value of those decisions. The Act also imposes meaningful restrictions
    on post-Government employment of covered officials, and these
    restrictions are important to ensure an unbiased operation of the
    procurement system.

        81. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi and Vice Admiral Pappano, do you
    believe that it is important to be able to assess accurate cost and
    pricing data from contractors, especially for sole-or single-source
    contracts?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed, I will work with the Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Acquisition (ASD(A)) to understand the
    implications of accurate cost and pricing data--particularly in sole-
    source situations--on acquiring goods and services at fair and
    reasonable prices. I understand competition is the preferred method for
    obtaining fair and reasonable pricing, however that is not always
    possible. I understand that access to accurate cost and pricing data
    from contractors, provides the Government with a reliable way to verify
    contractor assertions or statements during negotiations.

        82. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi and Vice Admiral Pappano, if you
    are confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that contractors are
    not price-gouging or overcharging the Federal Government?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I believe competition affords the U.S. Government
    means to acquire goods and services at the best value, thus preventing
    or reducing risk of price gouging. If confirmed, I will work with the
    ASD(A), where appropriate, to understand what measures are in place,
    and what additional efforts may be needed to safeguard against price
    gouging.

        83. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, should DOD's industrial base
    strategy be influenced by partisan political activities?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed, I believe DOD's industrial base
    strategy should be driven by objective national security requirements.
    My focus will be on strengthening the industrial base through objective
    assessments and ensuring predictable, stable resourcing to effectively
    support our warfighters.

        84. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, should DOD's acquisition
    decisions be influenced by individuals with conflicts of interest
    involving contracts or other business before DOD?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed, I will ensure OASD(IBP) priorities, in
    partnership with my colleagues throughout A&S, align with those of the
    President, and Secretary Hegseth, while ensuring robust, secure,
    resilient, and innovative industrial capabilities are delivered to the
    warfighter.
                            research and development
        85. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, does the Federal Government
    benefit from partnering with colleges, universities, nonprofits, and
    federally funded research and development centers?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. In my view, yes. Partnering with colleges,
    universities, nonprofits, and FFRDCs is essential for the Federal
    Government, especially when it comes to the defense industrial base.
    These organizations bring a wealth of expertise, cutting-edge research,
    and a talent pipeline that we simply can't replicate on our own.
    However, the Department must work with these entities to ensure that
    national defense information is safe and secure from exploitation and
    expropriation. By working together, we can leverage their strengths to
    address critical national security challenges and maintain our
    technological advantage.

        86. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, under your leadership, will your
    agencies continue to work with colleges, universities, nonprofits, and
    federally funded research and development centers to research and
    address our toughest national security challenges?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed--yes. Collaborating with colleges,
    universities, nonprofits, and FFRDCs is certainly something I see as
    valuable. If confirmed, I will continue to consider these relationships
    as a key avenue for addressing national security challenges.
             protecting classified information and federal records
        87. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, what is your understanding of
    the need to protect operational security, or OPSEC?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Operational Security is practiced to deny
    adversaries the opportunity for an advantage over U.S. forces. Proper
    OPSEC protects critical information and the mission and the men and
    women executing it.

        88. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, what are the national security
    risks of improperly disclosing classified information?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. It is generally accepted that the improper or
    unauthorized disclosure of classified information could be expected to
    cause identifiable or describable damage to national security. The
    describable damage and certainty of that damage would depend on the
    details of the information released, including the level of
    classification, as well as the extent and nature of the disclosure.
    Determining the extent of damage to national security is part of the
    unauthorized disclosure process as outlined in DOD policy, and I would
    defer to the Department for additional specifics.

        89. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, what would you do if you learned
    an official had improperly disclosed classified information?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed and in such a situation, I would
    immediately take steps to secure the information, assess the situation,
    and report the incident to the appropriate security officials for
    mitigation and appropriate action in accordance with law and policy.

        90. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, what is your understanding of
    government officials' duties under the Federal Records Act?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed, I will adhere to the Federal Records
    Act and the applicable DOD policies that implement it, which ensure
    that the Federal records I create or receive are appropriately
    maintained.

        91. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, should classified information be
    shared on unclassified commercial systems?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. No.
                                  competition
        92. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, how can DOD's acquisition
    policies increase competition in the defense industrial base?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Several acquisition policy adjustments can increase
    competition in the defense industrial base. These include streamlining
    the process, especially for smaller and non-traditional vendors;
    promoting modular open systems architectures; increasing the use of
    Other Transaction Authorities via the Commercial Solutions Opening
    process and other flexible contracting mechanisms; and actively
    engaging a diverse range of potential suppliers, including small
    businesses and startups. If confirmed, I look forward to working with
    the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition on these and other
    initiatives as well as partnering with the Defense Innovation Unit to
    strengthen the defense industrial base.

        93. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, under what circumstances should
    DOD pursue those policies?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Policies to increase competition should be pursued
    strategically, considering the specific circumstances of each
    acquisition program. Factors like criticality, technology maturity,
    urgency, and potential risks of using non-traditional vendors should be
    weighed. If confirmed, I look forward to working with the ASD(A) on
    these and other initiatives to strengthen the defense industrial base.

        94. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, in what ways might DOD be
    negatively impacted by ``vendor lock-in,'' that is by becoming
    dependent on a single vendor?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Vendor lock-in can hinder competition, drive up
    costs, and limit innovation both in acquisition and in sustainment.
    Relying on a single vendor risks disruptions from financial
    instability, cybersecurity breaches, or production delays. If
    confirmed, I would leverage all of the authorities and programs under
    the ASD(IBP)'s purview to prioritize fostering competition in the DIB,
    attract new and non-traditional entrants, and carefully evaluate vendor
    dependencies to mitigate these risks.

        95. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, according to the GAO, DOD's
    mergers and acquisitions team consists of only two to three full-time
    equivalent employees. Do you think that indicates DOD is adequately
    prioritizing and resourcing its processes to determine if prospective
    mergers and acquisitions harm national security?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. While I am not familiar with the precise figures
    cited by the GAO, I do agree that adequate staffing and resourcing are
    critical for effectively evaluating the national security implications
    of mergers and acquisitions. A workforce of two to three full-time
    equivalents certainly seems like a small team to handle such a large,
    complex, and important task. If confirmed, I will assess the current
    workload, the complexity of the transactions being reviewed, and the
    resources available to determine if adjustments are needed to ensure
    we're properly safeguarding national security.

        96. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, in your advance policy questions
    you wrote, ``If confirmed, I will work to ensure that the DOD
    rigorously evaluates the implications of M&A activities on the
    industrial and technological base, leveraging its unique perspective to
    assess potential risks to supply chain resilience, innovation, and
    operational readiness. The Department must also maintain active
    awareness of how ongoing M&A activities influence cost, schedule, and
    performance across defense acquisition programs. When appropriate, the
    DOD should voice concerns and work with regulatory agencies to address
    acquisitions that give rise to concerns. I will advocate for a
    proactive approach that strengthens oversight mechanisms, enhances
    interagency coordination, and ensures that America's DIB remains
    competitive, secure, and aligned with national security priorities.''
    Do you think DOD's industrial base strategy should be informed by an
    understanding of the impacts of past mergers and acquisitions on the
    current health of the defense industrial base, including the most
    vulnerable sectors like missiles and munitions?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. In my view, understanding the impacts of past
    Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) is essential for informing a robust and
    effective industrial base strategy. Analyzing historical trends,
    particularly in vulnerable sectors like missiles and munitions, can
    help us identify potential risks and vulnerabilities associated with
    future M&A activity. This includes assessing the impact on competition,
    innovation, supply chain resilience, consolidation, and overall cost
    and performance of defense programs. If confirmed, I will focus on
    incorporating these historical lessons learned into our strategic
    planning to ensure a more proactive and informed approach to
    safeguarding the health and competitiveness of the defense industrial
    base.

        97. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, do you think using modular open
    systems approaches in acquisition can help encourage competition and
    result in reducing costs and program delays and increasing technical
    performance?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Modular open systems approaches can enhance
    competition, reduce costs and delays, and improve technical
    performance. By enabling interoperability and integrating components
    from multiple vendors, they help avoid vendor lock-in and encourage
    innovation. Effective implementation requires careful planning, and if
    confirmed, I would promote their use where appropriate.
                            artificial intelligence
        98. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, in what ways might DOD benefit
    from increased competition in the artificial intelligence and cloud
    computing markets?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. The American artificial intelligence (AI) industry
    is currently a source of competitive advantage over our adversaries.
    Our commercial sector is the leading edge of innovation, driving
    powerful capabilities into both private industry and the DOD. Increased
    competition in the AI market--with respect to both AI model development
    and cloud infrastructure--would benefit DOD by driving down costs,
    fostering innovation, and accelerating the development of cutting-edge
    AI capabilities. A more competitive landscape also ensures a wider
    range of vendors--especially small and medium sized businesses--
    reducing reliance on single-source providers. The diversified market
    created by increased competition would likely allow DOD to promote
    greater interoperability and prevent vendor lock-in, enabling DOD to
    adopt best-in-class solutions. Finally, a robustly competitive
    environment promotes higher quality and more tailored AI solutions to
    address DOD's unique and complex operational requirements.
        Increased competition in the market offers significant benefits to
    DOD including greater competition to drive down costs, fueling
    innovation, enhance resilience and avoid vendor lock, and creating more
    tailored solutions.

        99. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, in what ways might DOD be
    impacted by consolidation in the artificial intelligence (AI) and cloud
    computing markets?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Consolidation in the AI and cloud computing markets
    would likely negatively impact DOD. A consolidation of the AI or cloud
    computing market, similar to the post-cold war consolidation of the
    defense and aerospace industry, would likely stifle competition and
    increase costs; suppress innovation; and reduce access to frontier AI
    and cloud capabilities. Furthermore, a consolidated market could lead
    to increased vendor lock-in, making it more difficult for DOD to adopt
    best-in-class solutions from alternative non-traditional vendors.
    Furthermore, a less diverse market could hinder the development of
    specialized AI solutions tailored to DOD's unique operational
    requirements, ultimately frustrating DOD's ability to integrate
    advanced applications of AI in support of lethality and management
    efficiencies.

        100. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, in what ways might DOD benefit
    from the adoption of interoperable AI and cloud computing tools?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. The adoption of interoperable AI and cloud computing
    tools have the ability to greatly enhance DOD's lethality and
    efficiency, as well as increase coordination across the Department. It
    would also increase operational agility and result in cost
    efficiencies. Interoperability allows AI and cloud systems to share
    data, models, and outputs, enabling operational agility.
    Interoperability also increases opportunities for scalability, reducing
    duplicability and costs of fielding AI and cloud systems across the
    enterprise. Interoperability encourages a more modular and open
    approach to technology development. This allows smaller, innovative
    companies to contribute to the DOD's technology ecosystem, fostering a
    more dynamic and competitive market. It also makes it easier to
    integrate cutting-edge commercial technologies into military
    applications.

        101. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, in what ways might DOD benefit
    from multicloud solutions when contracting for cloud computing tools?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. The Department of Defense (DoD) can benefit
    significantly from multicloud solutions when contracting for cloud
    computing tools in several ways:? avoiding vendor lock, enhanced
    security and resilience, optimization for specific workloads, increased
    flexibility and innovation, fostering competition and innovation,
    meeting data sovereignty and regulatory requirements, leveraging
    specialized services, improving recovery capabilities from disaster and
    outages, and cost optimization.

        102. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, earlier this month the White
    House's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released a memorandum
    titled ``Driving Efficient Acquisition of Artificial Intelligence in
    Government'' (hereinafter the ``OMB memo''). That memo states that ``As
    agencies seek to accelerate the adoption of AI-enabled services, they
    must pay careful attention to vendor sourcing, data portability, and
    long-term interoperability to avoid significant and costly dependencies
    on a single vendor.'' Do you believe this statement might provide
    useful guidance for DOD? Please explain why or why not.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Yes, this statement provides useful guidance for
    DOD. The rapidly developing nature of AI capabilities requires DOD to
    be able to access the latest commercial solutions from not only
    traditional defense companies, but also newer and non-traditional
    entities. Vendor lock-in stifles agility and innovation, which
    undermines DOD's ability to act quickly and efficiently. Vendor
    sourcing is also important in terms of supply chain risk management,
    since digital technologies often rely on people or parts from outside
    the United States.

        103. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, the OMB memo also states that
    terms regarding ``Vendor Lock-In Protections . . . are necessary to
    reduce the risk that switching vendors could become cost-prohibitive.
    Protections against vendor lock-in can vary, but include requirements
    for vendor knowledge transfers, data and model portability, providing
    agencies with rights to code and models produced in performance of a
    contract, and transparency in licensing and pricing.'' Do you believe
    this statement might provide useful guidance for DOD? Please explain
    why or why not.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed, I will review the methods the DOD
    currently employs to protect against vendor-lock, as I do agree that
    the Department should take measures to ensure robust competition is
    maintained to continue encouraging innovation from industry.

        104. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, the OMB memo states that
    ``agency processes should address . . . Data Handling'' by
    ``[p]roviding clear guidance on handling, access, and use of agency
    data or information to ensure, among other purposes, that such
    information must only be collected and retained by a vendor when
    reasonably necessary to serve the intended purposes of the contract.''
    Do you believe this statement might provide useful guidance for DOD?
    Please explain why or why not.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. Data is critical to mission success, and the OMB
    memo's emphasis on careful data handling provides useful guidance. If
    confirmed, I look forward to collaborating with DOD colleagues to
    ensure OASD(IBP) alignment with departmental guidance on this vital
    issue.

        105. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, the OMB memo states that
    ``agency processes should address . . . Use of Government Data'' by
    ``[e]nsuring contracts permanently prohibit the use of non-public
    inputted agency data and outputted results to further train publicly or
    commercially available AI algorithms, consistent with applicable law,
    absent explicit agency consent.'' Do you believe this statement might
    provide useful guidance for DOD? Please explain why or why not.
        Mr. Cadenazzi. The DOD takes data protection seriously and, if
    confirmed, I will ensure that all policy and regulations are enforced
    so Government data is secure and used appropriately.
                             defense production act
        106. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, what role does the Defense
    Production Act (DPA) play in addressing economic coercion from the
    People's Republic of China?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. It is my understanding that an authority like the
    Defense Production Act (DPA) plays a crucial role in countering
    economic coercion from China by allowing for efforts to reduce our
    reliance on foreign sources for critical materials and technologies. It
    also gives us a meaningful role in reviewing foreign investment in U.S.
    businesses for potential coercive influence. If confirmed, I would work
    to ensure the DPA is utilized strategically and effectively to mitigate
    the risks of economic coercion from China.

        107. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, some critics argue that the DPA
    is too broad and affords too much discretion to the President. Do you
    agree?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I understand the perspectives regarding the scope of
    the DPA and the Presidential authorities it provides. The DPA's breadth
    allows for flexibility in responding to national security needs, but it
    also necessitates careful consideration of its application.
    Transparency, congressional oversight, and engagement with stakeholders
    are important elements in ensuring its responsible and effective use.
    If confirmed, I would be committed to working with this committee to
    address these considerations.

        108. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, would a lapse of the DPA damage
    U.S. national security and industrial preparedness?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. It is my understanding that a lapse of the DPA would
    certainly present challenges to U.S. national security and industrial
    preparedness, since it provides valuable authorities for prioritizing
    critical industries, strengthening supply chains, and ensuring timely
    access to essential materials and technologies. Losing these tools
    would undoubtedly impact our ability to respond effectively to national
    security emergencies and could potentially leave us vulnerable to
    adversarial pressures. Maintaining a robust and adaptable DPA is
    important for ensuring our national security and industrial resilience.
    If confirmed, I would advocate for ensuring the DPA remains a viable
    tool for the Department.

        109. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, did the first Trump
    administration and Biden administration effectively use the DPA to
    address the threat to Americans posed by the coronavirus pandemic?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. It is my understanding that both the Trump and Biden
    administrations utilized the DPA and similar CARES Act authorities to
    respond to the COVID-19 pandemic, taking actions to address critical
    supply shortages and bolster domestic production of essential medical
    equipment and supplies. The effectiveness of these actions is a complex
    issue with varying perspectives, and there are certainly lessons to be
    learned from both Administrations' experiences. If confirmed, I would
    be committed to reviewing those lessons learned and working with this
    committee to ensure the DPA is utilized effectively in future crises.

        110. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, do you believe there are ways
    that the first Trump administration and Biden administration fell short
    or were misguided in their use of the DPA?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I'm not aware of all past decisions on DPA
    utilization from both Administrations to make that assessment. I trust
    that those decisions were made based on the best available information
    and analysis at the time, given the evolving circumstances. If
    confirmed, I'm committed to continually refining our approach to DPA
    implementation and leveraging lessons learned to ensure its effective
    and strategic application in the future.

        111. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, is DOD currently using the DPA
    in an appropriate manner to map critical national security supply
    chains and illuminate dependencies and chokepoints?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. I am not aware of all the DPA efforts. If confirmed,
    I look forward to reviewing the process to ensure we are optimally
    utilizing the DPA to map critical national security supply chains,
    identify dependencies, and address potential chokepoints effectively.

        112. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, how do you plan to use lesser-
    used authorities in title VII of the DPA, including voluntary
    agreements and mandatory survey authorities?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed, I look forward to gaining a deeper
    understanding on how authorities have been utilized. I commit to assess
    the effectiveness and determine how we can better leverage these tools
    to strengthen the DIB.

        113. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, DPA allows the President of the
    United States and subsequently DOD to influence domestic industry in
    the interest of national defense. DOD can utilize funding under this
    authority to ``establish, expand, maintain, or restore'' domestic
    capacity for critical components and technologies. How should DOD plan
    to improve competition in the defense industry under this authority?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. The DPA is a critical tool that enables the DOD to
    strengthen domestic industrial capacity in support of national defense.
    If confirmed, I look forward to assessing the ongoing efforts under
    this authority, identifying opportunities to enhance competition within
    the defense industry, and ensuring that we are effectively utilizing
    the DPA to strengthen the DIB.

        114. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, should DPA reauthorization
    include any new or expanded authorities?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. DPA reauthorization presents an opportunity to
    strengthen and expand authorities that support national security and
    industrial resilience. If confirmed, I look forward to understanding
    where gaps may exist in the current framework and recommending specific
    areas for consideration to ensure we are maximizing the DPA's
    effectiveness in addressing critical supply chain challenges and
    emerging defense needs.

        115. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, would it be preferable to have
    a flexible DPA authority that allows the President to ameliorate
    shortfalls by supply chain sector or a more narrow one that requires it
    only be used for specific program requirements?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. It's my understanding that a flexible DPA authority
    would allow us address supply chain shortfalls more effectively across
    sectors. If confirmed, I look forward to evaluating and identifying
    ways to optimize its use to strengthen the defense industrial base.

        116. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, do you believe that the
    President should have the full authority granted to him by the Defense
    Production Act?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. It is my understanding that DPA provides significant
    authority to the President, and the appropriate use of that authority
    requires careful consideration and balance. If confirmed, I will work
    with this committee to ensure the DPA is utilized effectively.

        117. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi, would you support congressional
    efforts to limit or strip the full authority granted to the President
    by the Defense Production Act?
        Mr. Cadenazzi. If confirmed, I look forward to working with
    Congress to better understand the perspectives on the DPA's authorities
    and flexibilities.

                                     ______

        [The nomination reference of Mr. Michael P. Cadenazzi, Jr.
    follows:]

                                     ______

        [The biographical sketch of Mr. Michael P. Cadenazzi, Jr.,
    which was transmitted to the Committee at the time the
    nomination was referred, follows:]

                                     ______

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

      [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

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

                                     ______

        [The nomination of Mr. Michael P. Cadenazzi, Jr. was
    reported to the Senate by Chairman Wicker on May 13, 2025, with
    the recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The
    nomination was confirmed by the Senate on September 18, 2025.]
                                    ------

        [Prepared questions submitted to Vice Admiral Scott W.
    Pappano, USN by Chairman Wicker prior to the hearing with
    answers supplied follow:]

                            Questions and Responses
                           duties and qualifications
        Question. Section 3213 of the National Nuclear Security
    Administration Act states that the Principal Deputy Administrator shall
    be appointed ``from among persons who have extensive background in
    organizational management and are well qualified to manage the nuclear
    weapons, nonproliferation, and materials disposition programs of the
    Administration in a manner that advances and protects the national
    security of the United States.''
        What background, experience, and expertise do you possess that
    qualify you for appointment to this position?
        Answer. My qualifications are founded upon the bedrock of a strong
    technical education with an undergraduate degree in marine engineering
    from the U.S. Naval Academy and a graduate degree in nuclear
    engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Both my
    education and leadership were honed across a 36-year career as a
    nuclear submarine officer and military acquisition professional where I
    humbly led exceptional teams at all levels. As a submarine line
    officer, I completed sea rotations on five submarines across all
    classes, culminating in command of a nuclear attack submarine. I also
    served as a Military Assistant for an Assistant Secretary of Defense
    charged with both strategic nuclear deterrence and non-proliferation
    policy. As a military acquisition professional, I served as major
    program manager for lifecycle sustainment of operational strategic and
    attack submarines, oversaw research and development activities of the
    Naval Undersea Warfare Center labs, established a program executive
    office to focus on cradle-to-grave lifecycle activities for all nuclear
    strategic ballistic missile submarines, and eventually served as
    Principal Deputy to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy charged with
    overseeing the procurement and sustainment of all Navy and Marine Corps
    weapon systems. I understand the complexity of the threats and the
    critical importance of the NNSA mission. I have a deep understanding of
    Naval nuclear propulsion. I oversaw the recapitalization of our sea-
    based strategic nuclear deterrent and worked closely with other
    stakeholders engaged in nuclear modernization efforts to include
    STRATCOM, Strategic Systems Programs, the United Kingdom Dreadnought
    Alliance, and other legs of the U.S. Nuclear Triad. I supervised
    contract performance at our nuclear shipbuilders and led the stand-up
    of a Navy industrial base team to collaborate with Department of
    Defense stakeholders and Congress to target industrial base investment
    in critical infrastructure, supply chain capacity and resilience,
    manufacturing technology, and workforce development. I believe that, if
    confirmed, my background, experience, and expertise would be well-
    suited to execute the duties of NNSA Principal Deputy Administrator.
        Question. What is your understanding of the duties and functions of
    this position?
        Answer. If confirmed as NNSA Principal Deputy, I will be
    responsible for executing duties and responsibilities as prescribed by
    the Administrator in support of maintaining and enhancing the safety,
    security, and effectiveness of the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile;
    reducing the global danger from weapons of mass destruction; providing
    the U.S. Navy with safe and militarily effective nuclear propulsion;
    and responding to nuclear and radiological emergencies. I would be
    required to act for, and exercise the powers of, the Administrator when
    the Administrator is disabled or the position is vacant.
        Question. Section 3213 goes on to State that the Principal Deputy
    Administrator ``shall perform such duties and exercise such powers as
    the Administrator may prescribe, including the coordination of
    activities among the elements of the Administration.''
        If confirmed, what additional duties and responsibilities, if any,
    do you expect that the Administrator for Nuclear Security would
    prescribe for you?
        Answer. If confirmed, and subject to the authorities of the
    Administrator, I would expect to oversee the implementation and
    accountability of contracts, procurement, administrative, budget, and
    planning activities. In addition to coordinating activities among the
    elements of the Administration, I would be required to engage with
    other key leaders across the Department of Energy, as well as external
    stakeholders, to ensure collaborative efforts to drive for resiliency,
    efficiency, and innovation across the nuclear weapons enterprise.
        Question. If confirmed, what would be your main priorities be in
    this position?
        Answer. If confirmed, my main priority would be to maximize the
    efficiency, effectiveness, capability, and capacity of NNSA, national
    security labs, plants, and production facilities to achieve priorities
    established by Administrator for nuclear stockpile stewardship, nuclear
    weapons production, critical infrastructure recapitalization, non-
    proliferation and counter-proliferation activities, and advancing
    technology and innovation.
        Question. What are the major challenges you would expect to
    confront if confirmed as the Principal Deputy Administrator?
        Answer. NNSA is currently executing seven simultaneous stockpile
    modernization programs while also recapitalizing its aging and
    deteriorating production infrastructure and design, certification, and
    assessment capabilities to support the current and future deterrent.
    Additionally, nuclear proliferation challenges are rising because of
    the evolving geopolitical environment.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you address these challenges?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Administrator, the NNSA
    leadership team, the Secretary of Energy, the Deputy Secretary of
    Energy, DOD, and Congress to recognize challenges early and implement
    strategies to address them.
                             conflicts of interest
        Question. Federal ethics laws, to include 18 U.S.C. Sec. 208,
    prohibit government employees from participating in matters where they,
    or certain family members or organizations with which they have certain
    relationships, have a financial interest.
        Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to disclose any
    potential conflicts of interest, including investments, business ties,
    family relationships, or other connections that could be perceived as
    influencing your decisionmaking?
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, that
    if a conflict of interest arises, you will recuse yourself from
    participating in any decisions regarding that specific matter?
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you commit, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    decisionmaking on the merits and exclusively in the public interest,
    without regard to private gain or personal benefit?
        Answer. Yes.
                   nnsa organization and management structure
        Question. The NNSA Act of 2000, as amended, establishes that the
    Administrator for Nuclear Security``. . . shall be subject to the
    authority, direction, and control of the Secretary [of Energy]. Such
    authority, direction, and control may be delegated only to the Deputy
    Secretary of Energy, without re-delegation.''
        What is your view on the relationship between the Secretary of
    Energy and the Administrator of NNSA in statute and in recent practice?
        Answer. Statutorily, NNSA is subject to the authority, direction,
    and control of the Secretary of Energy. I believe that the NNSA
    Administrator must have a strong and healthy relationship with the
    Secretary of Energy and Deputy Secretary of Energy in order for NNSA to
    succeed. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Secretary, Deputy
    Secretary, and the Administrator to ensure successful execution and
    delivery of NNSA's missions.
        Question. How is the ``semi-autonomous'' nature of the NNSA, as set
    forth in the NNSA Act, reflected in NNSA's organizational structure?
    What makes NNSA different from the domains of the other Under
    Secretaries of the Department of Energy (DOE)--in both law and
    practice?
        Answer. The NNSA Act provides the guidance and authority necessary
    for the NNSA Administrator to carry out NNSA's various missions under
    the direction of the Secretary and Deputy Secretary. The NNSA Act
    provides that the NNSA has full authority over and is responsible for
    the core functions of the NNSA which include: maintaining the safety,
    security and effectiveness of the nuclear deterrent; preventing,
    countering and responding to proliferation and terrorism threats; and
    providing operational support for naval nuclear propulsion. To carry
    out those core missions, the NNSA Act further provides that the NNSA
    Administrator has full responsibility for the following areas that
    support performance of the core functions: budget formulation and
    execution, personnel, health and environmental safety, emergency
    management, procurement, legal, legislative matters, and public
    affairs. For all other DOE organizations over which the Under
    Secretaries have cognizance, all of these core functions are performed
    centrally by DOE support organizations. Finally, all NNSA Federal
    personnel and NNSA contractors are subject only to the direction and
    control of the Administrator, who is accountable to the Secretary and
    Deputy Secretary.
        Question. With a view to improving organizational management and
    operational effectiveness, would you recommend the Administrator pursue
    any changes to the structure of NNSA?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will focus on strengthening the
    coordination and integration of activities across NNSA's nuclear
    security enterprise to bolster the organization's ability to deliver in
    line with its commitments. I will work with the Administrator and NNSA
    leadership to enable productive relationships across NNSA's
    laboratories, plants, and sites, and with interagency partners while
    also fostering a strong culture of accountability, responsibility, and
    efficiency.
                                 relationships
        Question. Please describe your understanding of the relationship of
    the Principal Deputy Administrator with the following officials:
        The Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Energy
        Answer. If confirmed, I will report through the Administrator to
    the Deputy Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Energy. In the
    Administrator's absence, I will represent NNSA.
        Question. The Administrator for Nuclear Security
        Answer. If confirmed, I will report directly to the Administrator.
        Question. The Deputy Administrators of the NNSA
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Deputy Administrators to
    support the execution of their respective missions.
        Question. The Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental
    Management
        Answer. If confirmed, I will interact with the Assistant Secretary
    of Energy for Environmental Management on environmental management
    issues that overlap with NNSA.
        Question. The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear
    Deterrence, Chemical and Biological Defense Policy and Programs
        Answer. NNSA's Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs serves as
    the primary point of contact with the Assistant Secretary of Defense
    for Nuclear Deterrence, Chemical and Biological Defense Policy and
    Programs. If confirmed, I will support the Administrator and NNSA's
    priorities with the Assistant Secretary, as appropriate.
        Question. The Chairman of the Nuclear Weapons Council
        Answer. The Administrator is a member of the Nuclear Weapons
    Council. If confirmed, I will support the Administrator and NNSA's
    priorities to the Chairman of the Nuclear Weapons Council.
        Question. The Commander of United States Strategic Command
        Answer. If confirmed, I will support the Administrator and NNSA's
    priorities to the Commander of United States Strategic Command.
        Question. The nuclear directorates of the Air Force and Navy
        Answer. If confirmed, I will support the Administrator and NNSA's
    priorities to the nuclear directorates of the Air Force and Navy.
        Question. The Associate Administrator of NNSA for Acquisition and
    Project Management
        Answer. I understand NNSA reorganized its Office of Acquisition and
    Project Management to the Office of Infrastructure and the Office of
    Partnership Acquisition Services. If confirmed, I will support the
    Administrator by providing management oversight for the Associate
    Administrator for Infrastructure and the Associate Administrator for
    Partnership Acquisition Services.
        Question. The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
        Answer. If confirmed, I will support the Administrator and NNSA's
    priorities to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.
               relationship with the department of defense (dod)
        Question. If confirmed, you will support the Administrator in his
    role as a member of the Nuclear Weapons Council (NWC), together with
    the Under Secretaries of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment,
    Policy, and Research and Engineering, as well as the Vice Chairman of
    the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Commander of U.S. Strategic Command.
    Since the 1946 Atomic Energy Act, when it was designated as the
    ``Military Liaison Committee,'' the primary purpose of the NWC is to
    serve as the civilian-military interface and set the military
    requirements for the nuclear weapons stockpile, which form the basis of
    the core mission of NNSA. The Department of Defense (DOD) is, in a
    sense, NNSA's primary customer.
        How would you assess the relationship between NNSA and the DOD, at
    both senior management levels, as well as at working levels?
        Answer. Coming from the Navy and having worked on a major future
    leg of the deterrent, I have been able to witness these relationships
    first-hand. From my current perspective, NNSA and DOD integrate their
    work well and maintain a positive working relationship. This
    collaboration will be essential to manage the increased demands being
    placed on the nuclear security enterprise. It is imperative that NNSA
    and DOD continue to integrate their unique capabilities,
    responsibilities, and schedules to maintain a safe, secure, and
    effective nuclear deterrent.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you recommend to improve
    this relationship?
        Answer. If confirmed, I plan to maintain regular engagements with
    my DOD counterparts. I hope to use my previous experience within DOD to
    foster a positive and proactive relationship in support of NNSA's role
    as a dynamic partner.
        Question. Do you believe that NNSA is adequately responsive to the
    requirements set by the DOD?
        Answer. Yes, but I recognize the shifting strategic environment has
    increased demands on the nuclear security enterprise. If confirmed, my
    goal is to maintain continual communication and collaboration with DOD,
    ensure that DOD requirements are appropriately informed by the nuclear
    security enterprise's design and production capacity, and, if
    necessary, improve NNSA's ability to rapidly respond to DOD
    requirements.
        Question. Do you believe it important for the NWC to ensure the
    NNSA is adequately funded through the interagency budget process to
    meet DOD's requirements?
        Answer. Having been the Program Executive Officer for Strategic
    Submarines, I recognize the breadth of the NNSA portfolio and the
    requirement for NNSA to maintain a budget capable of supporting
    activities necessary to meet DOD requirements. If confirmed, I look
    forward to working with the Secretary of Energy, the Office of
    Management and Budget, and the NWC to ensure NNSA alignment with the
    DOD.
                                  nnsa budget
        Question. The workload of the NNSA has seen an unprecedented
    increase over the past several years, a increase that is expected to
    continue for the foreseeable future. However, growth in the NNSA budget
    has consistently failed to keep pace with inflation and failed to fully
    resource a variety of projects understood to be critical capability
    needs, such as tritium and conventional high explosives production.
        Multiple independent commissions, including congressional
    Commissions on the National Defense Strategy, Reforms to the Planning,
    Programming, Budgeting, and Execution, and Strategic Posture of the
    United States have highlighted that U.S. defense investments are
    inadequate for addressing the international security threats facing the
    United States. These conclusions have been echoed by many Members of
    Congress.
        Do you agree that sustained real growth in the defense budget,
    including the national security functions of the Department of Energy,
    of at least 3 to 5 percent is necessary to meet global security
    challenges without incurring significant additional risk?
        Answer. In my current capacity, I am not privy to the details on
    budget development for the national security functions of DOE. If
    confirmed, I will work with the Administrator, the Secretary of Energy,
    the Deputy Secretary of Energy, and the Office of Management and Budget
    to request the funding necessary for NNSA to achieve its national
    security missions.
        Question. 10 U.S.C. 179 requires the Nuclear Weapons Council to
    examine the NNSA budget before its submission to the Office of
    Management and Budget (OMB) to ensure it can meet DOD requirements, and
    provide confirmation of such review to Congress.
        If confirmed, do you commit, without qualification, to complying
    with the requirements of 10 U.S.C. 179 with regard to the annual NWC
    examination of the NNSA budget prior to its submission to OMB?
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. How would you support the Administrator in ensuring
    compliance with this provision, including providing the NWC with
    adequate time to review the budget before its submission to OMB?
        Answer. In my current capacity, I have not been briefed on this
    process. If confirmed, I will work with the Administrator, the NWC, and
    the Secretary of Energy to ensure compliance with this provision.
        Question. If confirmed, what standards would you recommend the
    Administrator employ in measuring the adequacy of the NNSA budget?
        Answer. Measuring the adequacy of the NNSA budget requires
    considering how well the implementation of NNSA strategy documents
    meets statutory requirements and achieves the goals of the
    Administration. If confirmed, I look forward to evaluating NNSA's
    budget in cooperation with my departmental and interagency counterparts
    and establishing the budget levels required to fulfill NNSA's statutory
    and administrative objectives.
                        nuclear policy and modernization
        Question. United States nuclear forces are the bedrock of our
    Nation's defense, underpin our most critical alliances, and have
    deterred nuclear aggression and great power conflict for more than 70
    years. Unfortunately, long deferred investments have left us with
    systems and production capabilities beyond or nearing the end of their
    useful lives. These capabilities must be updated to maintain a viable
    nuclear deterrent.
        Do you agree with the assessment of past Secretaries of Defense
    that nuclear deterrence is the Nation's highest priority mission and
    that modernizing our Nation's nuclear forces is a critical national
    security priority?
        Answer. Yes. Our nuclear deterrent has been the backbone of U.S.
    national defense for decades, and its modernization is essential. NNSA
    must continue to deliver a safe, secure, and effective stockpile to the
    DOD. If confirmed, I commit to supporting this critical mission.
        Question. If confirmed, do you commit to support and advocate for
    full funding for efforts to comprehensively modernize the Nation's
    nuclear weapons stockpile, including supplemental capabilities like the
    warhead for the sea-launched cruise missile, the supporting sustainment
    and production infrastructure, and experimental capabilities, and
    accelerate such programs wherever possible?
        Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I will help advance the modernization of
    the U.S. nuclear stockpile, including SLCM-N, and the facilities and
    capabilities across the enterprise that underpin the deterrent.
        Question. In its unanimous bipartisan conclusions, the 2023
    Strategic Posture Commission (SPC) highlighted the rapidly growing
    threats facing the United States, now and in the coming decades from
    China's unprecedented nuclear and military force expansion, Russia's
    aggression and investment in destabilizing strategic capabilities, and
    growing regional nuclear and missile threats from North Korea and Iran.
    To address these threats, the SPC recommended, among other steps, that
    the U.S. should expedite its ongoing nuclear force modernization
    activities, modify its strategic nuclear force structure to account for
    the rapid growth of China's nuclear forces and the unprecedented need
    to deter two nuclear-armed peer adversaries, and urgently develop
    additional theater range nuclear options.
        Do you agree with the conclusions of the SPC regarding global
    threats to U.S. interests?
        Answer. Yes, I agree with the SPC's conclusions about global
    threats to U.S. interests, the challenges posed by two near-peer,
    nuclear-armed adversaries, and the risk of coordinated or opportunistic
    aggression. If confirmed, I will consider what efforts NNSA has already
    undertaken to respond to such challenges and how NNSA can harness its
    unique assets and workforce to promote peace through strength and
    enable a more stable global environment.
        Question. What is your understanding of how Russia, China, and
    North Korea have expanded and/or modernized their nuclear force
    capabilities?
        Answer. The geopolitical threat landscape is dynamic, and in recent
    years its complexity has only increased. If confirmed, I will support
    NNSA's efforts to maintain America's technological superiority over our
    adversaries and ensure that they cannot gain a strategic advantage. I
    will also seek relevant briefings on nuclear threats to ensure that
    NNSA's work is aligned with the requirement to deter and counter
    potential threats to U.S. interests.
        Question. In your view, how does NNSA support strategic competition
    with the countries highlighted by the SPC and contribute to the overall
    national security of the United States?
        Answer. NNSA's multiple nuclear-related missions support the
    Nation's nuclear deterrent, U.S. counterterrorism and
    counterproliferation goals, nonproliferation, arms control, and
    militarily effective naval nuclear propulsion. Each of these efforts
    allows the United States to project power and influence well beyond its
    shores, and all make positive contributions to the Nation's safety and
    security. Each of these key mission areas contribute to a strong
    national defense and cause adversaries to question whether they can
    match our Nation in the nuclear domain.
        Question. Do you support continued collaboration with the United
    Kingdom in the maintenance of its independent nuclear deterrent?
        Answer. Yes, collaboration with the United Kingdom is a key element
    of our national security. As one of the United States' longest and most
    reliable partners, continued cooperation with the United Kingdom on the
    capabilities and technologies that underpin our respective nuclear
    deterrents advances out mutual defense and security.
        Question. Past Administrations have conducted Nuclear Posture
    Review (NPR) to define the upcoming overarching U.S. nuclear policy and
    strategy. The last NPR, conducted in 2022 by the Biden administration,
    emphasized the importance of modernizing our stockpile, NNSA
    facilities, and the workforce. Although the Secretary of Defense is the
    primary cabinet official responsible for policymaking regarding nuclear
    weapons, the support of the Secretary of Energy and the Administrator
    for Nuclear Security are crucial to successful execution of the nuclear
    mission.
        If confirmed, what role, if any, would you expect the Administrator
    to assign to you in the conduct of the Trump administration's NPR,
    should it choose to conduct one?
        Answer. If confirmed, pending any new NPR deliberations, I will
    work with the Administrator to determine what duties and
    responsibilities I could best execute to support this Administration in
    its efforts to modernize the U.S. nuclear deterrent and promote peace
    through strength.
        Question. If confirmed, what changes to the policies outlined by
    the 2022 NPR would you recommend the Trump administration consider?
        Answer. I am not yet aware of what deliberations may be occurring
    regarding a planned or future NPR. I support full scope modernization
    of the U.S. nuclear deterrent, its triad, nuclear command, control, and
    communications, and the infrastructure and scientific capabilities that
    support a safe, secure, reliable and effective nuclear stockpile. If
    confirmed, I would prioritize the necessary briefings to understand the
    complex threats posed to the United States and how the nuclear security
    enterprise, in coordination with DOD, can best deter those threats.
        Question. Should the upcoming NPR call for the development of
    additional nuclear capabilities, will you commit, if confirmed, to
    supporting those additions and ensuring that NNSA fully supports the
    new requirements?
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Arms control, when effective and verifiable, has been a
    valuable tool for managing competition and international security
    concerns. In contrast, unverifiable arms control regimes observed by
    only one party can generate instability.
        Do you believe that further reductions should be taken only within
    the context of a formal, verifiable arms control agreement with Russia,
    China and other nuclear-armed powers?
        Answer. The decision to pursue future arms control agreements will
    be made by the President. If confirmed, I look forward to working with
    partners at other agencies, including State, the Intelligence
    Community, and Defense, to support the President in this area. I will
    also leverage NNSA's unique expertise and capabilities to develop
    monitoring and verification tools, including the ability to
    unilaterally monitor activities, so that the United States is prepared
    to meet future arms control opportunities and challenges.
                            nuclear weapons council
        Question. In your view, what are the most significant issues the
    Council should take up in the coming years?
        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to supporting the NNSA
    Administrator, broadening my knowledge of the nuclear security
    enterprise, and collaborating with my fellow DOD colleagues through the
    NWC. While I am not currently informed of internal deliberations of the
    NWC, I do believe that the NWC should take a strategic approach to
    prioritizing the execution of the existing Program of Record. The NWC
    should continue to identify opportunities to accelerate the Program of
    Record, but equal attention to the recapitalization of the enterprise
    is required to secure NNSA's ability to continue serving the deterrent
    into the future.
        Question. If confirmed, will you commit to fully supporting the
    Administrator's participation in NWC matters?
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. If confirmed, will you commit to working with the staffs
    of the other members of the NWC and the interagency to ensure that
    annual budgets adequately support the modernization and sustainment of
    the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile?
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. The Fiscal Year 2025 National Defense Authorization Act
    restructured the existing Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear,
    Chemical, and Biological Defense Programs into the Assistant Secretary
    of Defense for Nuclear Deterrence, Chemical, and Biological Defense
    Policy and Programs. Congress took this action to cut through
    bureaucratic stovepipes in the Office of the Secretary of Defense and
    designate a single official as the principal civilian staff assistant
    responsible for nuclear policies, programs, and operations.
        What is your understanding of the role of this position in relation
    to the Nuclear Weapons Council and with regard to the overall DOD
    relationship with the NNSA?
        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to engagements with my
    counterparts as they implement this restructuring and aim to support
    further coordination between our organizations. I will support the
    Administrator and work with DOD partners to streamline communications
    between DOD and NNSA.
                                defense programs
        Question. Do you believe that the United States currently possesses
    the capabilities to ensure the stockpile is safe, secure, and
    reliable--without the need to resume nuclear explosive testing?
        Answer. Yes, and I agree with the nominee for NNSA Administrator's
    position on this matter. For nearly 30 years, the three national
    security laboratory directors and the Commander of U.S. Strategic
    Command have annually assessed the nuclear stockpile and determined
    that it remains safe, secure, and effective, with no technical issue
    that would require a return to underground nuclear explosive testing.
    The confidence provided by this annual assessment process has, in part,
    allowed the United States to continue observing an enduring moratorium
    on nuclear tests since 1992. If confirmed, I will continue to support
    the annual assessment process and will ensure NNSA continues to adhere
    to nuclear test readiness requirements while supporting a rigorous and
    effective Stockpile Stewardship Program.
        Question. What is your understanding of the current nuclear weapons
    stockpile modernization plan?
        Answer. I understand that NNSA is currently focused on delivering
    modernized warheads across all three legs of the nuclear triad in
    alignment with our DOD partners and continues to meet all DOD
    requirements. The current program of record includes weapons that have
    already been delivered such as the B61-12 and W88 Alt 370; weapons in
    advanced development and production stages that will soon be delivered
    such as the B61-13 and W80-4; and weapons in earlier stages of design
    and engineering that will be delivered in the 2030's, such as the W87-
    1, W93, and the warhead for the SLCM-N. These programs are all
    dependent on the recapitalization of infrastructure for producing
    weapons components and designing, certifying, and assessing these
    modernized warheads in addition to our existing stockpile. While I am
    encouraged by the nuclear security enterprise's responsiveness in
    rapidly standing up the B61-13 and SLCM-N programs to meet emerging
    requirements, deterrence is not static. Rather, it is a condition that
    must continually be maintained. I am certain that NNSA will need to be
    agile in responding to new DOD requirements as the security environment
    and the threats posed by our adversaries evolve.
        Question. Do you have any concerns with this level of effort
    required of NNSA and, in particular, concurrency between the plants and
    the laboratories?
        Answer. I have a high degree of confidence that NNSA and its
    nuclear security enterprise will be able to meet the challenge of
    delivering the growing program of record on time and on budget. If
    confirmed, I will reinforce the Administrator's enterprise-wide
    coordination efforts and work closely with my counterparts across the
    enterprise to ensure we remain aligned in our efforts and continue
    building on the progress we've made toward achieving our ambitious
    modernization and infrastructure recapitalization schedules.
        Question. Congress has authorized the Stockpile Responsiveness
    Program for the last several years in order to exercise design and
    engineering skills in support of the nuclear weapons mission, but this
    authority has not been fully utilized by NNSA.
        If confirmed, how would you support the Stockpile Responsiveness
    Program and make full use of the authorities it provides NNSA?
        Answer. The Stockpile Responsiveness Program (SRP) is among NNSA's
    most critical mechanisms for developing innovative technology,
    prototypes, and new capabilities needed to meet the emerging security
    environment. It also serves to develop talented nuclear security
    professionals. If confirmed, I will support the Administrator's goals
    for fully leveraging the SRP.
        Question. If confirmed, what are your long-term plans for the
    National Ignition Facility and other critical experimental facilities?
        Answer. The National Ignition Facility (NIF) is the world's highest
    energy laser and is one of the most important parts of NNSA's science-
    based stockpile stewardship program. It remains unrivaled due to the
    environments that are created, which were previously only possible with
    underground nuclear testing. If confirmed, I look forward to being
    briefed on NNSA's current long-term plans for NIF and other critical
    experimental facilities and to working with the Administrator, NNSA
    subject matter experts, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and
    Congress to determine any required updates to these plans.
        Question. What are your views of the Advanced Computing Program and
    what is your vision for the use of advanced computing in furtherance of
    NNSA missions?
        Answer. I understand that NNSA's Advanced Simulation and Computing
    Program has delivered unparalleled modeling and simulation capabilities
    that provide new insights into complex interactions within the nuclear
    weapons explosion process. As we deliver the current modernization
    programs of record and consider new weapon programs to meet emerging
    needs, I anticipate we will need even more powerful computing
    capabilities to run even more advanced physics models to ensure U.S.
    nuclear weapons remain safe, reliable, and able to meet DOD
    requirements. This will be especially true as NNSA integrates
    artificial intelligence and quantum computing capabilities. If
    confirmed, I will work with the NNSA Administrator to fully leverage
    the laboratories' deployed high-performance computing capabilities as
    well as acquire necessary new capabilities.
        Question. What role do you see in the application of artificial
    intelligence and machine learning tools in support of NNSA missions?
        Answer. Artificial intelligence (AI) has possible applications that
    may significantly advance national security activities. Integrating AI-
    based tools with NNSA's world-leading high-performance computing
    capabilities could enable greater efficiency in optimizing designs and
    discovering new materials to produce nuclear weapons components, which
    could accelerate the path from new concepts to delivering capabilities.
    If confirmed, I will work with the Administrator to accelerate
    integration of AI and machine learning applications to support NNSA's
    stockpile modernization and sustainment mission, as well as its
    nonproliferation, counterproliferation, and other critical objectives.
        Question. The NNSA depends upon a unique mix of private sector and
    government sources for research, development, and manufacture of
    critical technologies to support its national security missions.
    However, U.S. superiority in key areas of innovation is decreasing or
    has disappeared. Our competitors are engaging in aggressive military
    modernization and advanced weaponry development. Much of the innovation
    in critical technologies suitable for national defense purposes is
    occurring outside of the traditional defense industry.
        In your view, what technologies do you see as having the greatest
    impact on the missions of the NNSA in the future?
        Answer. AI and machine learning technologies hold vast potential
    for allowing NNSA to improve the nuclear security enterprise's existing
    systems and advance our modernization efforts. Fully integrating these
    tools into the enterprise will allow us to leverage the significant
    advantage we maintain over our adversaries in historical nuclear test
    data and production data to make nuclear weapon design and
    manufacturing faster and more efficient. If confirmed, I will work
    alongside the NNSA Administrator and coordinate with NNSA's labs,
    plants, and sites to ensure we use these technologies appropriately for
    our national security missions.
        Question. Do you believe NNSA is effectively developing this
    technology in comparison to our adversaries?
        Answer. I do not yet have insight into activities NNSA may be
    undertaking to develop this technology, but like the nominee for NNSA
    Administrator, I recognize the need to compete aggressively with our
    adversaries in this field. If confirmed, fully understanding this
    question will be a priority for me, and I will immediately seek to
    understand NNSA's efforts to date.
        Question. Are NNSA's investments in these technologies
    appropriately focused, integrated, and synchronized across all of the
    Administration's missions and with the DOD, where appropriate?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will diligently support and amplify the
    NNSA Administrator's efforts to coordinate technology investments
    across the nuclear security enterprise and with our DOD partners.
        Question. In general, do you see NNSA as a good partner for
    innovative, private sector entities?
        Answer. Yes. I believe that the unique and challenging work being
    done at NNSA's labs, plants and sites creates unique opportunities for
    private sector innovation and requires public-private collaboration. If
    confirmed, I will work with the Administrator and leadership at the
    labs, plants, and sites to enhance collaboration with the private
    sector to advance our world-class scientific preeminence.
        Question. What steps would you take to improve the NNSA's ability
    to engage industry, particularly innovative firms outside the
    traditional Nuclear Security Enterprise?
        Answer. Details about NNSA's engagements with industry partners are
    not yet available to me, but I understand that NNSA maintains strong
    engagement with industry partners on available contracting
    opportunities through various formal and informal means. If confirmed,
    I commit to soliciting feedback and suggestions from industry partners
    and implementing lessons learned from previous contract competitions.
                      construction and project management
        Question. NNSA has been plagued by cost overruns, schedule delays,
    and project cancellations related to the construction of nuclear
    facilities, including the Uranium Processing Facility, the Savannah
    River Plutonium Processing Facility, and the High Explosive Synthesis,
    Formulation, and Production Facility.
        In your opinion, what are the primary causes of these repeated
    failures in project management?
        Answer. NNSA's large construction projects face cost overruns and
    schedule delays. This is due to several factors, including contractor
    underperformance, lack of effective Federal oversight, supply chain
    challenges leading to delays in procurement, and contracts structured
    in ways that insufficiently incentivize performance. COVID-19 and
    economic conditions have also contributed to challenges facing these
    projects. If confirmed, I commit to advancing these important projects
    in support of our national security.
        Question. In your view, are the changes in NNSA project management
    practices undertaken over the last few years sufficient to address
    these problems?
        Answer. NNSA is improving its project management practices, but I
    recognize the need for further efforts in this area. If confirmed, I
    plan to seek out opportunities to leverage innovative strategies to
    deliver NNSA's mission more efficiently.
        Question. If not, what additional steps would you take, if
    confirmed, to improve the availability of highly qualified talent
    capable of managing intensive capital infrastructure projects?
        Answer. NNSA's infrastructure projects cannot be successful without
    qualified professionals. If confirmed, I will support efforts to
    recruit and retain talented individuals with commercial project
    management experience. I am also committed to developing effective
    teams to address our most pressing challenges in partnerships with the
    labs, plants, and sites.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific steps would you take to
    ensure that these project management failures are not repeated in the
    future?
        Answer. NNSA must balance minimizing burdensome oversight
    requirements with ensuring optimal oversight to improve project
    performance. If confirmed, I am committed to holding the individuals
    responsible for project management accountable, acting decisively when
    necessary, implementing lessons learned, improving cost estimating
    procedures, and identifying and taking advantage of opportunities for
    acceleration.
        Question. What specific change in policy, practice, organization,
    or regulation would you recommend in furtherance of this effort?
        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to taking stock of NNSA's
    current initiatives and policies to identify opportunities for
    improvement. I plan to refine policy to help the agency more accurately
    estimate costs, eliminate redundant requirements, and streamline
    acquisition and project management processes. Additionally, I will
    ensure that contracts are structured to incentivize performance.
        Question. In your view, does the Administrator for Nuclear Security
    need any additional authorities or flexibilities to address the root
    causes of these project management failures? Please explain your
    answer.
        Answer. My understanding is that DOE Order 413.3B governs program
    and project management for capital assets across the Department,
    including at NNSA. Applying thorough project management processes is
    key to minimizing risk and delivering capabilities in time to meet the
    needs they are intended to address at an acceptable cost. I support the
    recent memorandum released by Energy Secretary Wright, which
    prioritizes efficiency and mission execution at our national labs. If
    confirmed, I look forward to being briefed on how this applies to
    NNSA's infrastructure modernization efforts and working together to
    identify additional opportunities for implementing process changes in
    support of effective, efficient project management.
        Question. In 2014, largely in response to a string of the large
    project management failures, Congress created the Office of Cost
    Estimation and Program Evaluation (CEPE) in the Department of Energy.
    CEPE was modeled on the DOD Office of Cost Assessment and Program
    Evaluation (CAPE).
        In your view, is CEPE sufficiently staffed to effectively provide
    the Administrator for Nuclear Security with costing and project
    management advice on the variety of projects within NNSA?
        Answer. In my current capacity, I am not privy to NNSA's staffing
    details. I am also aware that, if confirmed, I will also serve as the
    Federal Salaries and Expenses Account Integrator and will oversee
    staffing needs for all of NNSA. I will ensure that CEPE is
    appropriately staffed to support the Administrator.
        Question. Does CEPE have sufficient authority and access to DOE
    data and information to serve its statutory purpose?
        Answer. In my current capacity, I am not privy to the procedures
    for accessing DOE data. I understand the importance of data in
    executing NNSA's statutory mission. I understand that data is key for
    CEPE's ability to provide independent advisement to me, the
    Administrator, NWC, and Congress. If confirmed, I will review whether
    CEPE has sufficient authority and access.
        Question. CEPE reports directly to the Administrator for Nuclear
    Security. If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that CEPE
    has adequate access to information and senior leaders in your
    organization, as necessary and appropriate?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will have regular engagements with CEPE and
    ensure access to senior leaders in order for CEPE to conduct its work
    and provide valuable insight for decisionmaking.
        Question. If confirmed, specifically how would you undertake to
    support and sustain CEPE capabilities and independence?
        Answer. In my current capacity, I am not privy to all of the
    capabilities that CEPE possesses. If confirmed, I will seek to better
    understand these unique and important capabilities and take the actions
    needed to maintain them.
                               plutonium strategy
        Question. NNSA has selected two sites for plutonium pit production:
    Los Alamos will produce approximately 30 pits per year and the Savannah
    River Plutonium Processing Facility (SRPPF) will produce up to 50 pits
    per year, for a projected two-site total of no fewer than 80 pits per
    year. These production targets were established several years ago,
    prior to revelations about the speed and scope of potential adversary
    nuclear force expansions.
        Do you believe and overall production target of no fewer than 80
    pits per year is sufficient to meet future demands for modernizing and
    adapting the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile?
        Answer. I am unaware of internal discussions regarding production
    targets to meet the current and future demands of the U.S. nuclear
    deterrent. If confirmed, I plan to work closely with the NNSA
    Administrator and laboratory, plant, and site leadership across the
    nuclear security enterprise to achieve full rate production and pursue
    opportunities to accelerate the production capability in support of the
    nuclear deterrent.
        Question. Do you support the two-site solution, initiated under
    President Trump's first term, for meeting statutory requirements for
    pit production?
        Answer. Yes, I support NNSA's two-site approach to supply no fewer
    than 80 war reserve plutonium pits.
        Question. What are your views on the January 16, 2025, district
    court settlement halting installation of classified equipment and
    construction of associated facilities at SRPPF until such time as NNSA
    prepares a new Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement?
        Answer. I am aware that the settlement agreement that brought an
    end to the lawsuit challenging the National Environmental Protection
    Act work done in support of pit production was mutually agreed upon by
    the NNSA and the plaintiffs. Per the Agreement, NNSA will conduct a
    Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) and issue a Record
    of Decision based on the findings of the PEIS. The Department agreed to
    complete this process within two and a half years and provide for
    enhanced public participation. If confirmed, I plan to carefully track
    this matter to ensure that pit production and the specific SRPPF
    project are not negatively affected.
        Question. What are your views on the Los Alamos site and its
    capabilities to achieve its pits per year production target to support
    the demands of the ongoing stockpile program?
        Answer. I congratulate NNSA, LANL, and the nuclear security
    enterprise on producing the first war reserve plutonium pit for the
    W87-1 last year. If confirmed, I will support the Administrator to
    prioritize and accelerate the production capacity required to support
    the nuclear deterrent.
        Question. SRPPF has been plagued by issues with design and
    construction since the decision was made to convert the partially
    completed Mixed Oxide Fabrication Facility into a facility for
    producing plutonium pits. The project also experienced significant cost
    growth and delays due to impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic and the
    post-pandemic spike in inflation.
        What is your understanding of the status of SRPPF and the project's
    likelihood of supporting NNSA efforts to meet the statutory requirement
    to produce no fewer than 80 plutonium pits per year?
        Answer. My understanding is that SRPPF will allow NNSA to produce
    at least 50 war reserve pits per year. I am also cognizant that NNSA
    must mitigate further schedule delays and cost growth.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to improve the
    performance of the project, both in terms of cost management and
    construction efficiency?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure NNSA's contract structures
    properly hold contractors accountable for their performance as well as
    incentivize efforts to accelerate project schedules and decrease costs.
                    uranium strategy and tritium production
        Question. Since the United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC)
    ceased enrichment operations in 2013, DOE has relied on the existing
    stockpile of highly enriched uranium (HEU) to support Naval Nuclear
    Propulsion, as well as the down-blending of recycled HEU to meet
    requirements for unobligated LEU for tritium production, but the
    available supply of HEU is finite. To address this supply limitation,
    the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 National Defense Authorization (NDAA)
    directed the Secretary of Energy to identify two to four sites for
    reestablishing unobligated domestic uranium enrichment, for both
    defense and civilian energy purposes, with an eye to begin construction
    no later than 2027.
        If confirmed, will you support the Secretary of Energy in meeting
    the requirement in the fiscal year 2025 NDAA outlined above?
        Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I am eager to learn more about NNSA's
    current plans to support departmental leadership in meeting this
    requirement.
        Question. The fiscal year 2025 NDAA specified that plans for
    reestablishing the enrichment capability should focus on ``modular,
    scalable facilities''. What are your ideas for how to proceed with such
    an effort?
        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to being briefed with the NNSA
    Administrator on how NNSA can best reestablish a domestic uranium
    enrichment capability in a flexible and resilient manner to meet
    defense mission requirements and the requirements in the fiscal year
    2025 NDAA.
        Question. A Government Accountability Office (GAO) report in 2014
    entitled ``Interagency Review Needed to Update U.S. Position on
    Enriched Uranium That Can Be Used for Tritium Production'' concluded
    that the DOE's policy on identification of obligated uranium was based
    on three international agreements and a series of policy decisions. Of
    the three agreements, GAO concluded that only one explicitly addressed
    tritium production, but that past State Department findings had
    consistently interpreted the other two agreements as imposing peaceful
    use restrictions on LEU for tritium production.
        Do you believe this GAO reading of all three agreements remains
    consistent with U.S. policy goals? In your view, should the State
    Department's prior findings be reevaluated?
        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to being briefed on this
    report. I do know that ensuring a consistent and continued supply of
    tritium is critical to the deterrent. I will support the NNSA
    Administrator in determining whether future actions are necessary. I
    will also work with the Administrator to ensure NNSA's production of
    tritium remains consistent with U.S. governmental policy and
    international agreements. I also understand that the views of
    international partners and the U.S. interagency may have changed in the
    time since this report was released and it would be worth reengaging
    our domestic and foreign partners to assess consistency with U.S.
    policy goals.
        Question. Section 3138 of the National Defense Authorization Act
    (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2020 directed the Department of Energy to
    ``determine whether the Agreement [between the United States of America
    and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland] for
    Cooperation on the Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defense Purposes,
    signed at Washington, July 3, 1958, . . . permits the United States to
    obtain low-enriched uranium for the purposes of producing tritium in
    the United States.'' The Secretary of Energy affirmed that such
    procurement of low enriched uranium can occur.
        What are your views on the accuracy of the Secretary of Energy's
    determination in this regard?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Secretary and the
    Administrator to evaluate the previous determination. Ultimately, I
    seek to maintain our mutually beneficial partnership with the United
    Kingdom.
                         fissile materials disposition
        Question. The United States and Russia committed to the disposition
    of 34 metric tons of weapons grade plutonium under the Plutonium
    Management and Disposition Agreement (PMDA) in 2000. The original plan
    by the United States was to convert excess weapons grade plutonium to
    mixed oxide reactor fuel for civilian reactors at the Savannah River
    Site (SRS). After spending billions of dollars, and following Russia's
    withdrawal from the PMDA in 2016, this project was abandoned in favor
    of diluting the plutonium and disposing of it at the Waste Isolation
    Pilot Plant (WIPP). The dilute and dispose process involves shipping
    the plutonium pits from Pantex to Los Alamos to be turned into oxide
    powder, then shipping then on to SRS for packaging, followed by final
    shipment to WIPP for disposal.
        Do you believe the United States should continue to dispose of its
    stockpiles of weapons-grade plutonium despite Russia's abrogation of
    the PMDA?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue NNSA's work to remove excess
    plutonium from South Carolina, consistent with the DOE-South Carolina
    Settlement Agreement. Regarding NNSA's broader excess plutonium
    disposition work, I will work with interagency partners to assess
    whether the United States should continue to comply with PMDA
    unilaterally.
        Question. What are your views on the dilute and disposal method?
        Answer. I am not currently privy to the details of the program. If
    confirmed, I look forward to being informed of the details of this
    program so that I can provide effective executive leadership.
        Question. What are your views on permanent disposal at WIPP?
        Answer. In my current capacity, I am not privy to the details of
    the program, though I understand that dilute and dispose, NNSA's
    program of record for plutonium disposition, includes disposal at WIPP.
    If confirmed, I look forward to familiarizing myself with the details
    of this program so that I can provide effective executive leadership.
        Question. What are your views of the logistics of shipping
    plutonium between Pantex, Los Alamos, SRS, and WIPP? In your opinion,
    could this process be simplified by shipping the pits directly to SRS
    to be converted to oxide powder there?
        Answer. I am not currently privy to the details of the program. If
    confirmed, I look forward to being briefed the details of this program
    so that I can provide effective executive leadership.
        Question. What are your views on reprocessing as an alternative to
    dilution and disposal?
        Answer. While I am not currently privy to the details of this
    program, I do know that changing NNSA's technical approach to plutonium
    disposition could be costly and could create challenges relative to the
    DOE-South Carolina Settlement Agreement.
                          nuclear safety and security
        NNSA was created partially in response to security lapses at the
    Los Alamos National Laboratory. Nonetheless, periodic security lapses
    have continued to occur, risking exposure of some of our Nation's most
    closely guarded secrets.
        Question. To what extent have the conditions that allowed such
    lapses to occur been corrected, in your view?
        Answer. I am dedicated to the continuous enhancement of security
    across all NNSA laboratories, plants, and sites, but I do not have
    details regarding current security infrastructure. If confirmed, I look
    forward to being briefed on existing security measures and related
    operations.
        Question. Section 3112 of the Fiscal Year 2025 National Defense
    Authorization Act prohibits the Secretary of Energy or the
    Administrator for Nuclear Security, after April 15, 2025, from
    admitting citizens or agents of the People's Republic of China, the
    Russian Federation, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, or the
    Islamic Republic of Iran to any national security laboratory, nuclear
    weapons production facility, or any site that supports the Naval
    Nuclear Propulsion Program.
        If confirmed, will you commit to ensuring full compliance with this
    provision across NNSA by the statutorily directed April 15, 2025, date
    for implementation?
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. In your view, are there further changes in policy,
    practice, management, or oversight to reduce the frequency of security
    issues at NNSA facilities that should be considered?
        Answer. I am not aware of any current security infraction that
    prompted this change; however, if confirmed, I will seek briefings on
    the NNSA's adherence to this prohibition and any additional measures
    that should be taken to protect operations. I am committed to close
    collaboration with Congress to guarantee the robust protection of
    NNSA's labs, plants, and sites. We must ensure that no adversary gains
    unauthorized access, except as explicitly required by current or future
    treaty obligations.
        Question. Over the past several years, there has been a dramatic
    increase in the number of unmanned aerial systems operating, both
    lawfully and unlawfully, in U.S. airspace domestically and over
    American military installations overseas.
        If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure the NNSA
    appropriately prioritizes and resources detection and defeat
    capabilities for UAS that pose a threat to NNSA facilities and assets?
        Answer. Protecting NNSA facilities and assets from Uncrewed
    Aircraft System (UAS) threats is a top priority. If confirmed, I look
    forward to being briefed on NNSA's UAS detection and defeat
    capabilities. I will also reinforce our collaborative efforts with
    other agencies to proactively address evolving threats and leverage the
    latest Counter UAS (CUAS) technologies.
        Question. If confirmed, will you commit to working with Congress
    and the interagency to better clarify U.S. Government roles and
    responsibilities for detecting, tracking, and if necessary, defeating,
    UAS within U.S. airspace?
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board and NNSA's
    Office of Enterprise Assessments have periodically reported accidents
    at various Department of Energy facilities over recent years, including
    explosions, radiation exposure, and leakage of hazardous materials--
    putting both personnel and the mission at risk. Yet, while personnel
    safety is critically important, the nuclear mission by definition
    involves some of the most hazardous materials on earth. Consequently,
    acceptance of a measure of risk is a prerequisite to accomplish NNSA's
    assigned missions.
        How should we balance safety, risk, and mission at NNSA facilities?
        Answer. The production, handling, and disposal of nuclear materials
    inherently involve significant risks. Therefore, prudent risk
    management of safety, programmatic, and other regulatory initiatives is
    achieved by maintaining vigilant and continuous oversight, supported by
    robust risk controls. If confirmed, I am committed to prioritizing
    safety across the organization, ensuring that risks are identified and
    effectively minimized while NNSA continues to successfully execute its
    critical and time-sensitive mission.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you recommend to improve
    the safety culture at the various NNSA labs and sites while still
    meeting mission requirements?
        Answer. The actions of senior leadership to establish and reinforce
    safety expectations are essential to cultivating a positive safety
    environment. I will work closely with the NNSA Administrator to ensure
    these expectations are communicated effectively by partnering with the
    leadership of our Management and Operating partners. I will emphasize
    NNSA's long-term commitment to safe operations by fostering an
    effective governance and management culture. Additionally, I will
    underscore the critical importance of empowering and actively engaging
    employees to provide feedback, while also promoting organizational
    learning. Reinforcing these principles will establish a strong
    foundation for enhancing the safety culture. If confirmed, I will
    prioritize a safety-conscious work environment where employees feel
    comfortable raising safety concerns, knowing that leadership is
    prepared to address these issues effectively. Furthermore, I will
    support our leadership by ensuring they have the necessary resources
    and tools to address any safety concerns in a timely and efficient
    manner.
                                 cybersecurity
        Question. What do you see as the primary cyber policy challenges
    for the NNSA and what suggestions do you have for addressing them?
        Answer. Cybersecurity threats are rapidly changing and evolving. If
    confirmed, I will ensure that we work in lockstep across the
    enterprise, as well as with our partners around the globe, to bolster
    cybersecurity, meet mission needs, and promote national security.
        Question. Do you believe that the NNSA's current capabilities,
    policies, and authorities allow for effective cybersecurity? If not,
    what steps should NNSA and the Department of Energy take to address any
    shortfalls?
        Answer. I have not yet been briefed on NNSA's current cybersecurity
    capabilities, policies, and authorities, but, if confirmed, will
    prioritize cybersecurity briefings to gain a deeper understanding
    before determining effectiveness.
        Question. What do you conclude from the recent cyber-attacks on
    telecommunications infrastructure involving Volt Typhoon and Salt
    Typhoon about the State of our cyber defenses?
        Answer. These recent attacks show the interconnectivity between
    public and private sectors. These partnerships must be strong, so that
    communication and coordination occur, and mitigations can be
    implemented expeditiously. It also highlights the importance of the
    work NNSA must do to maintain a highly capable cybersecurity program.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific measures would you take to
    improve cybersecurity culture across the NNSA workforce?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will focus on continued collaboration among
    cybersecurity teams across the enterprise, departmental elements, and
    other government partners. I will identify opportunities to streamline
    operations and gain efficiencies to improve secure mission activities.
        Question. How would you empower and hold key leaders accountable
    for improvements in NNSA cybersecurity?
        Answer. I have not yet been briefed on NNSA's cybersecurity posture
    but will leverage my experience in different fields within the Navy to
    drive operational improvements across the organization, including
    cybersecurity. If confirmed, I will ensure NNSA empowers key leaders
    from the top down to be accountable for adopting essential
    cybersecurity tools and enforcing critical cybersecurity mitigations.
        Question. If confirmed, how do you plan to work with the Department
    of Defense and other agencies in the coordination of cyber security
    initiatives?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work to remove obstacles that could
    impede NNSA's responsibilities to interagency partners. I understand
    NNSA actively collaborates with DOD and other agencies to support
    cybersecurity goals and explore ways to enhance the protection,
    exchange, and use of data.
                            regulation and oversight
        Question. Staff at NNSA's national laboratories often complain that
    they are overburdened by regulation and oversight, both internal and
    external, and that these contribute to the challenges in staying under
    cost and on schedule for major projects.
        Do you believe that environmental, safety, and construction
    regulations are properly applied to NNSA projects and operations?
        Answer. If confirmed, I am fully committed to ensuring the safe
    execution of operations across the nuclear security enterprise. This
    includes safeguarding the workforce, the public, and the environment in
    a manner that aligns with and supports NNSA mission execution. I am
    aware of and support the Administration's initiatives aimed at
    streamlining permitting processes and regulations for construction
    projects at DOE's national laboratories.
        Question. Do you believe these regulations undermine effective
    performance by the labs and efficient mission execution overall?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will support efforts to streamline
    regulatory processes, standardize performance expectations, and promote
    a practical, common-sense approach to the interpretation and
    application of requirements--aimed at enhancing NNSA's efficiency,
    innovation, and modernization across the enterprise. While I am not
    currently informed of the detailed implementation of regulations
    throughout the enterprise, I recognize that excessively rigid
    interpretations of regulatory requirements can result in operational
    inefficiencies. I am committed to utilizing available flexibilities,
    such as exemptions and equivalencies, to implement necessary controls
    while also pursuing regulatory relief where appropriate.
        Question. In your view, are the NNSA labs and production facilities
    subject to the appropriate level of oversight from the NNSA, DOE, the
    EPA, the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, the Government
    Accountability Office (GAO), and/or Congress?
        Are there certain oversight processes that are unnecessarily
    duplicative or purely bureaucratic, in your view?
        Answer. DOE Order 413.3B, which governs program and project
    management for the acquisition of capital assets, applies to NNSA.
    While this order provides essential structure and oversight, I
    recognize that its implementation can, at times, be burdensome. If
    confirmed, I will remain committed to ensuring that critical work is
    carried out in a timely and efficient manner within the framework of
    this order. I will leverage my experience as an acquisition
    professional in the Navy to actively engage with stakeholders to
    identify and address any inefficiencies arising from current oversight
    processes, and to develop effective solutions that support mission
    success.
        Question. If confirmed, what changes in regulatory or oversight
    structures would you recommend, and why?
        Answer. While I am not currently aware of the details of NNSA's
    regulatory and oversight frameworks, if confirmed, I will actively
    pursue opportunities to enhance operational efficiency, including the
    potential reform of regulatory requirements where such changes are both
    practical and beneficial.
                            safeguards and security
        Question. What role, if any, will you have in ensuring safety and
    security in the nuclear weapons complex?
        Answer. I will collaborate with the Administrator to champion
    initiatives that enhance modernization of safety and security at NNSA
    facilities, fostering a robust safety and security culture built on
    transparency, trust, and collaboration. This includes establishing
    clear expectations with our partners for sustained safety performance
    alongside successful mission accomplishment, recognizing that these
    goals are mutually reinforced. Additionally, I will partner with the
    Administrator and the security program office to implement systems and
    processes that prevent security breaches. I will actively engage in
    initiatives to improve security effectiveness and efficiency at all
    NNSA facilities. Working with our partners, we will ensure oversight
    practices support these objectives, driving continuous improvement in
    both safety and security.
        Question. In your opinion, what are the biggest safety and security
    threats to the facilities and materials in the nuclear weapons complex?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will collaborate with the Administrator to
    prioritize safe operations while accomplishing the mission and
    mitigating security threats such as cyber, material, transportation,
    and physical risks to NNSA. Ensuring the safety and security of NNSA's
    facilities and nuclear materials is paramount.
        Question. What role, if any, will you have in the NNSA's
    interactions with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board?
        Answer. I recognize and value the importance of maintaining a
    constructive working relationship with the DNFSB, supported by
    transparent and open lines of communication. While it is my
    understanding that the Department's overall engagement with the Board
    is managed by the Deputy Secretary of Energy, if confirmed, I will work
    closely with the NNSA Administrator in addressing DNFSB recommendations
    and advice related to safety matters at defense nuclear facilities
    across NNSA.
        Question. The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board and NNSA's
    Office of Enterprise Assessments have reported a number of accidents at
    the national laboratories in recent years that put both personnel and
    mission at risk. Yet, while personnel safety is critically important,
    the nuclear mission by definition involves some of the most hazardous
    materials with which we work in this country, and risk cannot be
    eliminated completely at the labs while continuing to accomplish the
    mission.
        How should we balance safety, risk, and mission at the national
    laboratories?
        Answer. NNSA must maintain consistent and robust safety
    performance, as safety and mission success are inherently
    interdependent. Achieving this balance requires thorough risk
    understanding, along with effective control and management of those
    risks. If confirmed, I will remain focused on strengthening
    collaboration between the laboratories and productionsites, while
    emphasizing the importance of continuous improvement in the safe and
    effective execution of NNSA's mission. I will be dedicated to fostering
    a culture that empowers employees to proactively anticipate, identify,
    report, and resolve safety concerns.
        Question. What steps would you recommend to improve safety culture
    at the labs while still meeting mission requirements?
        Answer. Senior leadership can cultivate a positive safety
    environment by establishing and reinforcing safety expectations. I will
    work closely with the NNSA Administrator to ensure these expectations
    are communicated effectively by partnering with the leadership of our
    Management and Operating contractors. I will emphasize NNSA's long-term
    commitment to safe operations by fostering an effective governance and
    management culture. Additionally, I will underscore the critical
    importance of empowering and actively engaging employees to provide
    feedback, while also promoting organizational learning. Reinforcing
    these principles will establish a strong foundation for enhancing the
    safety culture. If confirmed, I will prioritize creating a safety-
    conscious work environment where employees feel comfortable raising
    safety concerns, knowing that leadership is prepared to address these
    issues effectively. Furthermore, I will support our leadership by
    ensuring they have the necessary resources and tools to address any
    safety concerns in a timely and efficient manner.
                                nonproliferation
        Question. What do you perceive as the highest priorities of the
    nuclear nonproliferation programs at NNSA?
        Answer. The first priority is addressing the nuclear programs of
    Iran and North Korea. If confirmed, I will leverage NNSA's unique
    technical capabilities to support the Administration's policy toward
    Iran, and to implement and verify any future nuclear dismantlement
    agreement with either country. The second priority is improving our
    ability to detect nuclear proliferation activities as early as
    possible, including in denied areas like space. If confirmed, I will
    make it a priority to develop cutting-edge technologies to detect such
    threats. This will provide maximum time for policymakers to formulate a
    response and to stop threats as far from U.S. shores as possible. The
    third priority is enabling the American nuclear renaissance while
    ensuring that U.S. nuclear exports advance our national security
    interests. If confirmed, I will strengthen NNSA's engagements with U.S.
    nuclear companies and nuclear newcomer countries, to facilitate U.S.
    exports while meeting the highest standards of safeguards, security,
    and emergency preparedness.
        Question. What challenges does the emerging multilateral nuclear
    competition between the U.S., China, Russia, and North Korea pose to
    existing nonproliferation efforts?
        Answer. Emerging nuclear competition and greater cooperation among
    U.S. adversaries in opposition to U.S. interests are among the most
    challenging aspects of today's geopolitical environment. This dynamic
    makes it more difficult to reach arms control agreements and to mount
    coordinated international responses to attempts by nuclear proliferant
    states to acquire nuclear weapons. If confirmed, I am committed to
    leveraging NNSA's unique capabilities to mount a multi-layered defense
    against nuclear proliferation, even in the face of this challenging
    global environment.
        Question. Do you believe additional cooperative nonproliferation
    efforts are feasible in light of China, Russia, and North Korea's
    burgeoning cooperation on nuclear technologies and materials?
        Answer. Cooperation among China, Russia, and North Korea poses a
    major challenge to nonproliferation efforts. The days when China and
    Russia could be counted on to stand against North Korea's violation of
    its Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty obligations are long gone. However,
    a highly dynamic global security environment can present new
    opportunities alongside challenges. If confirmed, I look forward to
    discussing such opportunities in the nonproliferation sphere at the
    direction of the Administration.
        Question. If confirmed, what would be your nonproliferation R&D
    priorities?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will prioritize nonproliferation R&D that
    allows for earlier detection of global nuclear threats, including:

          Building space-based sensors for delivery to DOD for the U.S.
    Nuclear Detonation detection System (USNDS)

          Developing capabilities to detect and characterize
    foreign nuclear weapons activities;

          Improving capabilities to interdict nuclear materials
    outside of regulatory control; and

          Developing and advancing technical nuclear forensics
    analysis capabilities that can support strategic deterrence with time-
    critical decisions in the event of a nuclear or radiological incident.

        I will also prioritize R&D that strengthens fundamental
    competencies at the national laboratories, so they are prepared to
    respond flexibly to future threats.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps will you take to improve
    coordination across the NNSA on nonproliferation R&D and reduce
    duplicative efforts?
        Answer. In my current capacity, I am not privy to the details of
    NNSA's organizational structure for nonproliferation R&D. However, to
    be effective and efficient, this office must conduct its work in full
    coordination with all relevant offices, not just across NNSA, but
    across the entire U.S. Government. If confirmed, I look forward to
    being briefed on any duplicative efforts in this area and discussing
    efforts to increase efficiency.
                               emergency response
        Question. What is your understanding of the NNSA's roles and
    responsibilities with regard to responding to domestic and
    international radiological events?
        Answer. NNSA's Nuclear Emergency Support Team (NEST) is prepared to
    respond to radiological and nuclear emergencies that may occur around
    the world. Additionally, as a party to the IAEA's Convention on
    Assistance in the Case of a Nuclear Accident or Radiological Emergency,
    NNSA leads nuclear and radiological response in the international
    arena. This includes cooperating with other states to promptly provide
    assistance in such cases. In some cases that involve U.S. national
    security, public health and safety, and economic interests, NNSA also
    provides direct bilateral or multilateral assistance to international
    partners. This includes forensic capabilities in support of
    international law enforcement efforts to investigate and attribute an
    incident. Domestically, NNSA oversees the Department's Emergency
    Operation Center and 24/7 Watch Office, which provides watch and
    warning, situational awareness, and decision support capabilities for
    domestic and international incidents.
        Question. Do you believe NNSA is adequately resourced and staffed
    to fulfill its existing emergency response responsibilities?
        Answer. In my current capacity, I am not privy to details
    concerning the resources and staffing of NNSA's emergency response
    capabilities. Emergency response is a vital part of NNSA's mission. If
    confirmed, I will assess NNSA's current staffing levels and resources
    in this area, and work to ensure their sufficiency.
        Question. In your view, how would you characterize the allocation
    of roles and responsibilities across the interagency, particularly with
    regard to the DOD and the Department of Homeland Security?
        Answer. When it comes to nuclear and radiological emergency
    response, NNSA coordinates closely with interagency partners,
    especially DOD for international incidents and DHS for domestic
    incidents. If confirmed, I will make every effort to ensure that roles
    and responsibilities are clear. To the extent possible, I would reduce
    interagency redundancies and bureaucracy so that NNSA can efficiently
    respond to emergencies. Leveraging decades worth of technical expertise
    and response capabilities, NNSA helps keep America safe, secure, and
    prosperous. Additionally, NNSA and its national laboratories' technical
    nuclear weapons program expertise allow them to assess foreign nuclear
    weapons programs.
        Question. If confirmed, are there any adjustments to the allocation
    of interagency responsibilities you would expect to recommend or
    pursue?
        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to supporting the Administrator in
    streamlining emergency response processes and implementing efficiencies
    to ensure that NNSA provides Federal, State and local partners the
    support they need during crises. I will also support the agency's
    efforts to strengthen State and local response capabilities to enhance
    domestic resiliency.
                              personnel management
        Question. In your judgment, what is the biggest challenge facing
    the NNSA in effectively and efficiently managing its workforce?
        Answer. In terms of workforce, the biggest challenges facing NNSA
    are recruitment and retention of highly skilled technical employees.
    Factors contributing to this challenge include an aging workforce,
    remote duty stations with high cost of living competition with the
    private sector for the same skill sets, and the requirement for high
    level security clearances.
        Question. What recommendations do you have to improve NNSA's
    management of its workforce?
        Answer. In my current capacity, I am unaware of NNSA's workforce
    management practices. If confirmed, I will work with the Administrator
    to effectively manage the workforce to include mitigating recruitment
    and retention challenges.
        Question. In your judgment, how effective is the Department of
    Energy and the NNSA at identifying, promoting, and rewarding top
    performers?
        Answer. I have not been briefed on the DOE's or NNSA's performance
    management policies and practices. However, the success of NNSA depends
    on its workforce. If confirmed, I look forward to ensuring NNSA's
    ability to recognize and reward top performers.
        Question. Similarly, how effective is the Department of Energy and
    the NNSA at identifying and removing underperforming or
    counterproductive personnel?
        Answer. While I am not currently privy to personnel matters at
    NNSA, if confirmed, I will support the Administrator in fostering a
    culture of accountability and performance.
        Question. If confirmed, what would you recommend be done to improve
    NNSA talent management?
        Answer. Talent management is critical to NNSA's success. If
    confirmed, I would adopt a holistic approach to talent management,
    ensuring these efforts are aligned with agency goals. This includes
    identifying and filling talent gaps, managing employee performance
    through continuous feedback and recognition, offering training and
    professional development opportunities, and developing a pipeline of
    talent for future workforce needs.
        Question. Do you believe that NNSA has the appropriate number of
    civilian employees to perform its mission?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will review NNSA's staffing and ensure it
    is appropriately staffed.
        Question. If not, what would be the appropriate size of the NNSA
    civilian workforce and what, in your view, would the additional
    personnel accomplish that NNSA is not able to accomplish today? If
    confirmed, which specific components of the NNSA would you recommend
    growing?
        Answer. In my current capacity, I am not privy to details about
    NNSA's civilian workforce. If confirmed, I will assess NNSA's staffing
    levels and requirements.
        Question. Do you believe that NNSA has the appropriate
    capabilities--in both its civilian employee and contractor workforces--
    to perform its mission?
        Answer. I am not currently privy to details about NNSA's civilian
    and contractor workforces, but if confirmed, I look forward to
    assessing NNSA's current staffing levels and future needs.
        Question. If not, please explain what capabilities each such
    workforce requires to ensure that NNSA is fully mission capable?
        Answer. In my current capacity, I am not aware of the full extent
    of capabilities required by the NNSA Federal and contractor workforces.
    However, I believe there are areas for improvement such as project
    management and AI. If confirmed, I will work with the Administrator in
    rapidly assessing and addressing these issues.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific steps would you take to
    retain critical nuclear weapons expertise in both NNSA the civilian and
    the contractor workforces?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work to foster and develop internal
    talent pipelines at headquarters and across the nuclear security
    enterprise.
        Question. What programs, policies, or tools does NNSA need to
    better attract the diverse range of skillsets required to support the
    missions of the Administration to national security focused careers?
        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to assessing current programs,
    policies, and tools leveraged by NNSA to attract and retain a highly
    skilled workforce.
                               sexual harassment
        Question. What is your assessment of the current climate regarding
    sexual harassment and gender discrimination in the DOE and NNSA?
        Answer. I take the prevention and reporting of sexual harassment
    and sex discrimination seriously and, if confirmed, will continue to
    raise awareness and emphasize prevention at DOE and NNSA. In the event
    that an issue of this nature is brought to my attention, I will consult
    with appropriate stakeholders in DOE and NNSA and take appropriate
    action without delay.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take were you to
    receive or become aware of a complaint of sexual harassment or
    discrimination from an employee or contractor of the DOE or NNSA?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that complaints of this nature
    receive the serious attention they deserve across the enterprise. Any
    contractor or Federal employee who raises such an issue will be treated
    in accordance with all Federal laws and regulations.
                            relations with congress
        Question. What are your views on the State of the relationship
    between the NNSA and the Senate Armed Services Committee in particular,
    and with Congress in general?
        Answer. Support from the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC),
    and Congress more broadly, is vital to NNSA's ability to successfully
    advance its missions. Given SASC's role in authorizing the activities
    of NNSA, I understand the importance of sustaining a strong
    relationship with this Committee. If confirmed, I commit to maintaining
    a strong relationship with the Committee during my tenure.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to sustain a
    productive and mutually beneficial relationship between Congress and
    the NNSA?
        Answer. A productive relationship with Congress depends on the
    unfettered exchange of information. If confirmed, I am committed to
    supporting NNSA's strong relationship with Congress, including this
    Committee, and fostering consistent, transparent communication.
        Question. The safety, security, and functionality of the United
    States nuclear weapons stockpile is of paramount importance to our
    Nation's national security, and any potential issues that could
    undermine confidence in the reliability of U.S. nuclear forces are of
    the highest interest to Congress.
        If confirmed, will you commit, without qualification, that you will
    promptly notify this Committee of any significant issues in the safety,
    security, or reliability of the nuclear weapons stockpile?
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. In much the same manner as the Combatant Commanders
    within the Department of Defense, the Administrator for Nuclear
    Security is required by Section 4716 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act
    (50 U.S.C. 2756) to annually submit a list of priorities that were
    insufficiently funded by that year's budget request by the President.
    While unfunded requirements lists are invaluable tools in helping
    Congress understand executable funding opportunities, past
    Administrators have only sparingly fulfilled this requirement.
        If confirmed, will you commit to supporting the Administrator in
    fully complying with the statutory requirement to submit an annual
    unfunded priority list to Congress with the annual budget submission of
    the President?
        Answer. Yes.
                            congressional oversight
        Question. In order to exercise legislative and oversight
    responsibilities, it is important that this committee, its
    subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress receive
    timely testimony, briefings, reports, records--including documents and
    electronic communications, and other information from the executive
    branch.
        Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on request,
    to appear and testify before this committee, its subcommittees, and
    other appropriate committees of Congress? Please answer with a simple
    yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    provide this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees
    of Congress, and their respective staffs such witnesses and briefers,
    briefings, reports, records--including documents and electronic
    communications, and other information, as may be requested of you, and
    to do so in a timely manner without delay? Please answer with a simple
    yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    consult with this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate
    committees of Congress, and their respective staffs, regarding your
    basis for any delay or denial in providing testimony, briefings,
    reports, records--including documents and electronic communications,
    and other information requested of you? Please answer with a simple yes
    or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    keep this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees of
    Congress, and their respective staffs apprised of new information that
    materially impacts the accuracy of testimony, briefings, reports,
    records--including documents and electronic communications, and other
    information you or your organization previously provided? Please answer
    with a simple yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on
    request, to provide this committee and its subcommittees, and their
    respective staffs with records and other information within their
    oversight jurisdiction, even absent a formal Committee request? Please
    answer with a simple yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    respond timely to letters to, and/or inquiries and other requests of
    you or your organization from individual Senators who are members of
    this committee? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    ensure that you and other members of your organization protect from
    retaliation any military member, Federal employee, or contractor
    employee who testifies before, or communicates with this committee, its
    subcommittees, and any other appropriate committee of Congress? Please
    answer with a simple yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
                                     ______

        [Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]

                  Questions Submitted by Senator Dan Sullivan
                                 8(a) contracts
        1. Senator Sullivan. Vice Admiral Pappano, I recently toured an SBA
    8(a) contracting operation and saw firsthand the value 8(a) brings to
    the Federal customer in terms of cost and efficiency while delivering
    mission-critical solutions that increase our national security and
    warfighter readiness. 8(a) contracts represent the best ``bang for the
    buck'' for taxpayers, giving contracting officers additional
    flexibility while also maximizing efficiency by reducing red-tape. Do
    you see the value in increased efficiency in flexibility brought from
    initiatives such as the 8(a) program?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I look forward to learning more
    about small business programs supporting our national security
    missions. I will welcome and support approaches that streamline Federal
    procurement processes, provide maximum practicable opportunities to
    small businesses, while delivering cost effective solutions for our
    critical national security missions that align with the
    Administration's priorities.
                                     alaska
        2. Senator Sullivan. Vice Admiral Pappano, my State of Alaska is
    ``resource-rich but infrastructure poor''. We have fewer roads miles
    than the State of Connecticut, despite being 118 times larger. Alaska
    is also a lynchpin to American homeland defense and home to multiple
    bases which contribute to our national security. Some of these bases
    recently experienced energy security issues which highlighted the need
    for resiliency in our grid. The Department of Energy (DOE) contracts
    for many micro reactors have already been finalized. At what point will
    fuel be produced and allocated so that these innovators can start
    production?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Fuel for micro reactors is not in the purview
    of the National Nuclear Security Administration. I defer to the
    Department of Energy's Office of Nuclear Energy on this matter.
                                   __________
                 Questions Submitted by Senator Mazie K. Hirono
               national nuclear security administration workforce
        3. Senator Hirono. Vice Admiral Pappano, at facilities like the Y-
    12 National Security Complex and Los Alamos, more than 30 percent of
    employees are eligible for retirement in the coming years. We need a
    strategy to recruit, train, and retain the next generation of nuclear
    professionals if we are going to sustain the stockpile and support our
    Navy's nuclear propulsion needs. What is your assessment of the
    National Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA) current workforce
    development pipeline, and what specific steps would you take to
    strengthen recruitment and retention--especially for high-skill trades
    and early career nuclear professionals?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. In my current capacity, I am not aware of
    NNSA's current workforce development pipeline. If confirmed, I look
    forward to learning about NNSA's recruitment and retention efforts. In
    terms of workforce, the biggest challenges facing NNSA are recruitment
    and retention of highly skilled technical employees. If confirmed, I
    will work with the Administrator to address these challenges. This
    includes working with NNSA's M&O contractors, universities, and trade
    schools to ensure a pipeline of talent for future workforce needs.

        4. Senator Hirono. Vice Admiral Pappano, NNSA has struggled to add
    additional personnel required to update the nuclear arsenal. In your
    professional opinion, is this a good time to fire or offer buyouts to
    NNSA employees?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. NNSA's success is highly dependent on its
    workforce. If confirmed, I will advocate for NNSA's workforce to ensure
    the agency is able to deliver on its critical national security
    mission.
                               nuclear deterrence
        5. Senator Hirono. Vice Admiral Pappano, the NNSA is being asked to
    simultaneously modernize the stockpile, expand plutonium pit
    production, support the Navy's nuclear propulsion needs, and keep
    nuclear materials secure--all while a large portion of your workforce
    is nearing retirement. Without a robust and sustainable workforce, no
    amount of funding will deliver on these missions. How will you
    prioritize and accelerate NNSA's workforce development pipeline,
    particularly to replace retiring experts in areas like plutonium
    science, engineering, and uranium processing?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I look forward to learning
    about NNSA's recruitment and retention efforts. In terms of workforce,
    the biggest challenges facing NNSA are recruitment and retention of
    highly skilled technical employees. If confirmed, I will work with the
    Administrator to address these challenges. This includes working with
    NNSA's M&O contractors, universities, and trade schools to ensure a
    pipeline of talent for future workforce needs.

        6. Senator Hirono. Vice Admiral Pappano, do you believe the NNSA
    has done enough to partner with Historically Black Colleges and
    Universities (HBCU), minority-serving institutions, and tribal colleges
    to build a diverse and resilient nuclear workforce? If not, how would
    you expand these efforts?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. In my current capacity, I am not aware of the
    details on NNSA's partnership with HBCUs, minority serving
    institutions, and tribal colleges. However, I am aware that NNSA and
    the Department of Energy have a long history of collaboration with
    HBCUs, minority serving institutions, and tribal colleges. If
    confirmed, I will review NNSA's efforts in this area.
                                   __________
                Questions Submitted by Senator Elizabeth Warren
                                     ethics
        7. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if you are confirmed, will
    you commit not to seek any employment with or compensation from a
    defense contractor, including through serving on a board, as a
    consultant, or as a lobbyist, for 4 years after leaving DOD?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will comply with all laws and
    regulations regarding future employment for executive branch officials.

        8. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if you are confirmed, will
    you commit not to engage in any lobbying activities, including
    unregistered ``shadow'' or ``behind-the-scenes'' lobbying under the
    guise of consulting or advising, focused on DOD or any of its
    components for 4 years after leaving DOD?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will comply with all laws and
    regulations regarding future employment for executive branch officials.

        9. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if you are confirmed, will
    you commit to not engage in any lobbying activities, including
    unregistered ``shadow'' or ``behind-the-scenes'' lobbying under the
    guise of consulting or advising, on Department of Energy (DOE)-related
    matters, focused on DOE or any of its components for 4 years after
    leaving NNSA?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will comply with all laws and
    regulations regarding future employment for executive branch officials.

        10. Senator Warren. Admiral Pappano, will you commit not to seek
    employment, board membership with, or any other form of compensation
    from a company that you regulated or otherwise interacted with while in
    government, for at least 4 years after leaving office?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will comply with all laws and
    regulations regarding future employment for executive branch officials.

        11. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, during your nomination
    process, did anyone on the Trump campaign, transition team, or other
    closely related entity approach you about your loyalty to President
    Trump?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. No.

        12. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if you were approached
    about your loyalty to President Trump, did you sign a loyalty pledge or
    other similar oath? If so, please provide a copy of the text of that
    pledge or oath.
        Vice Admiral Pappano. No.

        13. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if you were approached
    about your loyalty to President Trump, did you make any verbal
    representations of loyalty? If so, please describe this representation.
        Vice Admiral Pappano. No.

        14. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, in November 2024, the New
    York Times and other news outlets reported that Boris Epshteyn, a top
    adviser to President Trump, allegedly requested payment from
    prospective political appointees to promote their candidacies for top
    positions within the Administration. Did you discuss the possibility of
    joining the Administration with Mr. Epshteyn at any time?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. No.

        15. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if you did discuss the
    possibility of joining the Administration with Mr. Epshteyn, did Mr.
    Epshteyn seek payment from you for promoting your candidacy for a
    position within the Administration?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. No.

        16. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, at any time, did lawyers
    for President Trump or members of President Trump's team approach you
    regarding Mr. Epshteyn and the allegations cited above? If so, please
    describe the information that they provided you (including copies of
    documents), what was discussed during any calls, and any other
    information pertaining to this interaction.
        Vice Admiral Pappano. No.

        17. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, were you in contact with
    Mr. Elon Musk at any time during your nomination process? If so, please
    describe the nature of those contacts.
        Vice Admiral Pappano. No.

        18. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, was Mr. Musk present or
    involved in any interviews you did related to your nomination? If so,
    please describe the nature of his involvement.
        Vice Admiral Pappano. No.

        19. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, was Mr. Musk involved in
    any way with your nomination, including but not limited to, directly or
    indirectly contacting Senators regarding their position on your
    nomination?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. I am not aware of any such involvement.

        20. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, who was in the room or
    participated in any of your interviews regarding your nomination?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. During the nomination process, I spoke with
    several members of the Trump-Vance Presidential Transition Team.

        21. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if you own any stock or
    hold any other interest in any defense industry or Department of Energy
    contractors, will you divest it to avoid even the appearance of a
    conflict of interest?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will follow the counsel of
    DOE ethics officials regarding any potential conflicts or perceived
    conflicts of interest.

        22. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, what do you consider the
    role of the press in a democracy?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Freedom of the press is a clearly defined
    protection as stated in the First Amendment.

        23. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, do you think it would be
    an appropriate use of taxpayer resources to ``dig up dirt'' on
    journalists who investigate or criticize you, your office, or the Trump
    administration?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Freedom of the press is a clearly defined
    protection as stated in the First Amendment.

        24. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, will you commit not to
    retaliate, including by denying access to government officials or
    facilities, against news outlets or individual journalists who publish
    articles that are critical of you, your office, your agency, or the
    Trump administration?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I commit to following the law
    and upholding the duties of my office.

        25. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, have you requested, or
    has anyone requested on your behalf, that any other person or third
    party sign a nondisclosure, confidentiality, non-disparagement, or
    similar agreement regarding your conduct in a personal or professional
    capacity?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. No.

        26. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, will you voluntarily
    release any individual from any such agreements before this committee
    votes on your nomination?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Not applicable.

        27. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, have you ever paid or
    promised to pay, or has anyone paid or promised to pay on your behalf,
    an individual as part of any non-disclosure, confidentiality, non-
    disparagement, or similar agreement?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. No.

        28. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if the answer to the
    previous question was yes, how much was promised, how much was paid,
    and what were the circumstances?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Not applicable.
                    congressional oversight and transparency
        29. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, what is your
    understanding of the role of the Department of Energy Inspector
    General?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Per the Inspector General Act, the Department
    of Energy's Inspector General is charged with investigating and
    auditing Department programs to combat waste, fraud, and abuse.

        30. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, will you ensure your
    staff complies with any Inspector General deadlines established for
    requested communications, documents, and witnesses, and that staff will
    be protected from reprisal for their testimony?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will comply with all laws and
    regulations related to service in the U.S. Government.

        31. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if you are not able to
    comply with any Inspector General requests and deadlines, will you
    notify the Republican and Democratic members of this committee
    regarding the basis for any good faith delay or denial?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will work to comply with
    requests from the Department's Inspector General in a timely manner. I
    would defer to the Office of the Inspector General to update the
    Committee on the progress of ongoing reviews.

        32. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if you are confirmed,
    will you commit to refusing to follow illegal orders from any
    individual, including the President?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. I do not accept the premise that the
    President will issue me an unlawful order. If confirmed, I will comply
    with all laws and regulations related to service in the U.S.
    Government.

        33. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, what actions would you
    take if you were given an illegal order from any individual, including
    the President?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. I do not accept the premise that the
    President will issue me an unlawful order. If confirmed, I will comply
    with all laws and regulations related to service in the U.S.
    Government.

        34. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, will you commit to
    voluntarily provide a deposition if you are requested by Congress to
    provide one?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Yes.

        35. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, will you commit to
    voluntarily testify in front of Congress if you are requested by
    Congress to do so?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Yes.

        36. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, will you commit to
    testify or provide a deposition in front of Congress if you are issued
    a subpoena to do so?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, in such a scenario, I will
    follow the advice of DOE's and NNSA's General Counsel regarding
    compliance with a subpoena.

        37. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, will you commit to
    providing information or documents to Congress voluntarily if you are
    requested to do so?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Yes.

        38. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, will you provide
    information or documents to Congress if you are issued a subpoena to do
    so?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, in such a scenario, I will
    follow the advice of DOE's and NNSA's General Counsel regarding
    compliance with a subpoena.

        39. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, will you commit to
    following current precedent for responding to information requests,
    briefings, and other inquiries from Congress, including the Senate and
    House Armed Services Committees and their minority members?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Yes.

        40. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if confirmed, will you
    commit to posting your official calendar monthly?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will post official
    engagements as needed and as appropriate. Given the sensitive nature of
    much of NNSA's work, not all official engagements may be made public.

        41. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, do you think the Federal
    Government has an overclassification problem? If so, please provide
    examples of overclassification you have encountered.
        Vice Admiral Pappano. In my current role and the one I am nominated
    for, I cannot speak to classification of documents and materials across
    the Federal Government.

        42. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if confirmed, do you
    think your department should pursue strategic technology to support
    automated declassification?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will review potential efforts
    on the use of strategic technology that supports automated
    declassification while protecting national security.
                                  project 2025
        43. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, have you discussed
    Project 2025 with any officials associated with the Trump campaign, the
    Trump transition team, or other members of the Trump administration? If
    so, please explain what you discussed, when you discussed it, and with
    whom you discussed it.
        Vice Admiral Pappano. No.

        44. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, have you discussed
    Project 2025 with any officials associated with the Heritage
    Foundation? If so, please explain what you discussed, when you
    discussed it, and with whom you discussed it.
        Vice Admiral Pappano. No.
                               foreign influence
        45. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, have you received any
    payment from a foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign
    government within the past 5years?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. No.

        46. Senator Warren. Mr. Cadenazzi and Vice Admiral Pappano, have
    you communicated with any foreign government or entity controlled by a
    foreign government within the past 5 years?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. I have disclosed all connections to foreign
    nationals as part of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management SF-86 and
    the related background investigation that was previously conducted and
    required for my nomination as the NNSA Principal Deputy Administrator.

        47. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, please disclose any
    communications or payments you have had with representatives of any
    foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government within
    the past 5 years and describe the nature of the communication.
        Vice Admiral Pappano. I have disclosed all connections to foreign
    nationals as part of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management SF-86 and
    the related background investigation that was previously conducted and
    required for my nomination as the NNSA Principal Deputy Administrator.
    I have received no payments from representatives of any foreign
    government or entity controlled by a foreign government.
                   retaliation and protecting whistleblowers
        48. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, do you believe that
    servicemembers, civilians, grantees, and contractors should be
    protected from any form of retaliation for coming forward about an
    illegal order, sexual assault or harassment, negligence, misconduct, or
    any other concern that they wish to raise?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will comply with all laws and
    regulations related to whistleblowers.

        49. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, have you ever retaliated
    against any individual for coming forward about an illegal order,
    sexual assault or harassment, negligence, misconduct, or any other
    concern that they wish to raise?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. No.

        50. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if you are confirmed,
    will you commit to protecting whistleblowers? If so, please specify how
    you will do so.
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will comply with the
    Department's whistleblower protection policies and standards.
                            impoundment control act
        51. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, do you believe the
    Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of Energy has the legal authority
    to block the disbursement of funds appropriated by Congress?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. During a transition year, it is routine for
    an incoming Administration to review expenditures before payments are
    made to ensure compliance with the law. I am not aware of any direct
    impacts to program funding from agency reviews related to NNSA.

        52. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, what is your
    understanding of the Impoundment Control Act?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. The Congressional Budget and Impoundment
    Control Act of 1974 is a Federal law that governs the role of Congress
    in the U.S. budget process.

        53. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, do you commit to
    complying with the Impoundment Control Act?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will comply with all laws and
    regulations related to service to the U.S. Government.

        54. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, do you commit to
    notifying the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, including the
    majority and minority, if you are asked not to comply with the
    Impoundment Control Act or not to expend the money that Congress
    appropriates or authorizes?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will comply with all
    applicable laws and statutes regarding the Federal budgetary process.

        55. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, the Constitution's
    Spending Clause (Art. I, Sec.  8, cl. 1) and Appropriations Clause
    (Art. I, Sec.  9, cl. 7) give Congress, not the Executive, power of the
    purse. The Supreme Court has unanimously upheld this power. Do you
    believe that impoundments are constitutional?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will comply with all
    applicable laws and statutes regarding the Federal budgetary process.

        56. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, the funding levels in
    appropriations bills passed into law are not targets or ceilings;
    instead, they are amounts the executive branch must spend, unless
    stated otherwise. Congress could--if it wanted the President to have
    discretion--write those amounts as ceilings. Do you agree?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will execute my
    responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law, to
    include appropriations legislation. I will ensure actions on this
    matter are informed by the Administration's legal positions.

        57. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, what is your
    understanding of the requirements for DOD/NNSA to obligate funding that
    Congress authorizes and appropriates, in accordance with the time
    period that Congress deems it to do so?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will comply with all
    applicable laws and statues regarding the obligation of funds.

        58. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, do you commit to
    expending the money that Congress appropriates and authorizes?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will follow the law.

        59. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, do you commit to
    following and implementing every provision of the annual National
    Defense Authorization Act passed into law?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will follow the law.

        60. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if you became aware of a
    potential violation of the Antideficiency Act, Impoundment Control Act,
    or other appropriations laws, what steps would you take?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will follow all applicable
    law and statutes.
                               acquisition reform
        61. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, what is your
    understanding of the Procurement Integrity Act and your obligations
    under that law?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. The Procurement Integrity Act (PIA) is
    intended to prohibit, and lay out consequences for, certain actions of
    Federal officials and others that would potentially compromise the
    integrity of Federal acquisitions. Under the PIA, I would be obligated:
    (1) not to knowingly disclose contractor bid/proposal information or
    source selection information prior to the award of a Federal
    procurement to which the information relates; (2) if I'm personally and
    substantially participating in a Federal procurement valued in excess
    of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold, to report any contact with
    offerors regarding non-Federal employment to designated officials, and
    either reject the offer or recuse myself from the procurement; and (3)
    not to accept compensation from a contractor as an employee, officer,
    director, or consultant, for a period of 1 year after I have taken
    certain actions in excess of $10 million, that have benefited the
    contractor (e.g., served as a Source Selection Authority or otherwise
    personally made a decision for NNSA to award a contract, subcontract,
    order, or modification thereto).

        62. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, do you believe that it is
    important to be able to assess accurate cost and pricing data from
    contractors, especially for sole-or single-source contracts?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. It is important to be a responsible steward
    of taxpayer dollars. If confirmed, I look forward to understanding
    NNSA's procurement and acquisition processes.

        63. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if you are confirmed,
    what steps will you take to ensure that contractors are not price-
    gouging or overcharging the Federal Government?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. It is important to be a responsible steward
    of taxpayer dollars. If confirmed, I will ensure NNSA processes include
    protections to preclude such activities from taking place.

        64. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if you are confirmed,
    will you commit to seeking refunds, including voluntary refunds, from
    contractors and companies that overcharge the Federal Government?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. It is important to be a responsible steward
    of taxpayer dollars. If confirmed, I will ensure NNSA processes address
    this and will ensure those processes are implemented.

        65. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if so, how do you plan to
    do so?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. It is important to be a responsible steward
    of taxpayer dollars. If confirmed, I will work with NNSA procurement
    and acquisition professionals and legal counsel to leverage national
    security requirements to ensure contractors are refunding overcharges.

        66. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, should DOD's acquisition
    decisions be influenced by individuals with conflicts of interest
    involving contracts or other business before DOD?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. As a nominee for the position of Principal
    Deputy Administrator at the National Nuclear Security Administration, I
    will not have purview over DOD acquisitions.
                            research and development
        67. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, does the Federal
    Government benefit from partnering with colleges, universities,
    nonprofits, and federally funded research and development centers?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. NNSA and the Department of Energy have a long
    history of collaboration with such entities. Much of the work done at
    the national laboratories is at the forefront of science and national
    security.

        68. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, under your leadership,
    will your agencies continue to work with colleges, universities,
    nonprofits, and federally funded research and development centers to
    research and address our toughest national security challenges?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I look forward to learning
    about the current collaborations between NNSA and such entities.
             protecting classified information and federal records
        69. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, what is your
    understanding of the need to protect operational security, or OPSEC?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. OPSEC is a critically important national
    program that applies to all agencies and is designed to deny
    adversaries the ability to collect, analyze, and exploit information
    that might provide an advantage against the United States. OPSEC
    protects information against inadvertent compromise through a process
    of continual assessment.

        70. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, what are the national
    security risks of improperly disclosing classified information?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. The improper disclosure of classified
    information may compromise sensitive national security information to
    adversaries, potentially endangering the United States and its allies
    and partners. Improperly disclosing classified information is also a
    violation of law.

        71. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, what would you do if you
    learned an official had improperly disclosed classified information?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Any person who has knowledge that classified
    information has been or may have been lost, possibly compromised, or
    disclosed to an unauthorized person must immediately report the
    circumstances to those who have the authority and responsibility for
    conducting incidents of security concern inquiries at NNSA.

        72. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, what is your
    understanding of government officials' duties under the Federal Records
    Act?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. The Federal Records Act of 1950 is a U.S.
    Federal law that provides the legal framework for Federal records
    management, including record creation, maintenance, and disposition.

        73. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, should classified
    information be shared on unclassified commercial systems?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. No.
                    national nuclear security administration
        74. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, what criteria should be
    used to reduce NNSA's workforce?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I look forward to assessing
    NNSA's current staffing levels and future needs. Determination of
    NNSA's staffing must be based on analysis that ensures the critical
    national security mission the organization undertakes. The complexity
    of that mission dictates careful analysis to ensure that NNSA is both
    right-sized and staffed with the varied expertise required to sustain
    mission success.

        75. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, what will you do if you
    determine workforce reductions in NNSA's workforce that occurred before
    your confirmation put NNSA's mission at risk?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will work with the
    Administrator, the Secretary of Energy, and the White House to ensure
    NNSA has the funding and staffing needed to execute its mission.

        76. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, how will you assess the
    impact of potential workforce reductions on stockpile sustainment,
    nonproliferation, and modernization programs?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. NNSA's success is highly dependent on its
    workforce. If confirmed, I will advocate for the resources needed to
    ensure NNSA's workforce is able to deliver on NNSA's critical national
    security mission.

        77. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, NNSA depends on a mix of
    Federal employees, contractors, and lab scientists to manage critical
    programs. If you determine that reductions in force have harmed NNSA's
    mission, what contingency plans would you implement to ensure continued
    oversight, safety, and security of the nuclear stockpile?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. I am not aware of reductions-in-force that
    have been implemented at NNSA at this time. If confirmed, I will review
    the contingency plans currently in place and will ensure the oversight,
    safety, and security of the nuclear stockpile.

        78. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, NNSA is conducting some
    of the largest modernization programs in its history. The Government
    Accountability Office (GAO) recently published a report that noted that
    NNSA's internal review ``concluded that it wouldn't be able to meet
    this workload without changes.'' Are you familiar with NNSA's review?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. In my current capacity, I am not privy to
    NNSA's internal review. If confirmed, I will review the report's
    findings.

        79. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if you are familiar with
    the NNSA's review referenced in the question above, how would you
    address the recommendations in the review?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. I am not familiar with the review referenced
    above. If confirmed, I will review the report's findings and determine
    whether plans are needed to address its recommendations.

        80. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, if you are not familiar
    with the NNSA's review referenced in the question above, will you
    provide this committee with your plan to address its recommendations in
    30 days?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will review the report's
    findings and determine whether plans are needed to address its
    recommendations.

        81. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, what is your plan to
    address NNSA's significant management challenges?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will review current program
    management practices and explore potential innovative strategies that
    could be implemented to more efficiently deliver NNSA's mission, such
    as streamlining project management requirements. I will support the
    Administrator in fostering a culture of accountability, determining the
    optimal level of oversight, implementing lessons learned, and
    reinforcing best practices for cost estimating.

        82. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, would it be harmful for
    NNSA workforce reductions to weaken U.S. leadership in
    nonproliferation?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. In my current capacity, I am not aware of the
    structure of NNSA's workforce. NNSA's success is highly dependent on
    its workforce. If confirmed, I will advocate for the resources needed
    to ensure NNSA's workforce is able to deliver on NNSA's critical
    national security mission.

        83. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, how do you think
    increasing our nuclear weapons spending will impact our adversaries'
    interest in doing the same?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Our adversaries have already been
    accelerating their nuclear modernization efforts for years. Our nuclear
    weapons stockpile remains safe, secure, reliable, and effective. NNSA
    must continue to be responsive to DOD requirements while developing
    capabilities to meet deterrence gaps of any kind that may emerge well
    into the future.

        84. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, how do you think our
    adversaries would interpret the United States resuming live fire
    nuclear weapons testing?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. For nearly 30 years, the three national
    security laboratory directors and the Commander of U.S. Strategic
    Command have annually assessed the nuclear stockpile and determined
    that it remains safe, secure, and effective, with no technical issue
    that would require a return to underground nuclear explosive testing.
    The confidence provided by this annual assessment process has, in part,
    allowed the United States to continue observing an enduring moratorium
    on nuclear tests since 1992. If confirmed, I will continue to support
    the annual assessment process and will ensure NNSA continues to adhere
    to nuclear test readiness requirements while supporting a rigorous and
    effective Stockpile Stewardship Program.

        85. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, given the Pentagon's $1.5
    trillion nuclear modernization program and Donald Trump's commitment to
    examining every aspect of the Federal Government for wasteful spending,
    will you assess whether any nuclear modernization programs should be
    identified for possible re-evaluation to cut unnecessary costs for the
    American taxpayer?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. The U.S. nuclear arsenal is the bedrock of
    our Nation's defense, ensuring the United States fields modern,
    reliable, and effective weapons to deter our adversaries. NNSA is
    entrusted with stewardship of taxpayer dollars which requires
    appropriate scrutiny. If confirmed, I will support the Administrator to
    identify areas where we can adopt innovative strategies to more
    efficiently deliver NNSA's mission.

        86. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, the NNSA's Office of
    Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation (DNN) works globally to prevent State
    and non-State actors from developing nuclear weapons or acquiring
    weapons-usable nuclear or radiological materials, equipment,
    technology, and expertise. Given that $185 million has been redirected
    from defense nuclear non-proliferation to weapons development, what
    impact will this shift have on non-proliferation programs at NNSA?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. In my current capacity, I am not aware of the
    particulars related to that funding or the reasoning leading to its
    redirection. If confirmed, I am committed to protecting the United
    States from the threat of nuclear proliferation.

        87. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, what will you do to
    ensure the non-proliferation programs referenced in the question above
    get the funding they need?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. If confirmed, I will work with the
    Administrator, Secretary of Energy, and the White House Office of
    Management and Budget to ensure NNSA's nonproliferation programs have
    the resources needed to execute their mission.

        88. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, will you provide, within
    60 days, an update on how the NNSA will execute its obligation under
    section 3124 of the Fiscal Year 2023 National Defense Authorization Act
    to ``seek to enter into an arrangement with the private scientific
    advisory group known as JASON to conduct, not later than 2030, an
    assessment of plutonium pit aging?''
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Yes.

        89. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, should NNSA generally
    follow GAO's best practices for an integrated master schedule to manage
    its programs?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Yes.

        90. Senator Warren. Vice Admiral Pappano, is program management
    enhanced by reliable lifecycle cost estimates and program milestones?
        Vice Admiral Pappano. Yes.
                                     ______

        [The nomination reference of Vice Admiral Scott W. Pappano,
    USN follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The biographical sketch of Vice Admiral Scott W. Pappano,
    USN, which was transmitted to the Committee at the time the
    nomination was referred, follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

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

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The nominee responded to Parts B-F of the Committee
    questionnaire. The text of the questionnaire is set forth in
    the Appendix to this volume. The nominee's answers to Parts B-F
    are contained in the Committee's executive files.]
    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                     ______

        [The nomination of Vice Admiral Scott W. Pappano, USN was
    reported to the Senate by Chairman Wicker on May 13, 2025, with
    the recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The
    nomination was confirmed by the Senate on September 18, 2025.]

                                     [all]