[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 39 (Wednesday, April 13, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[Congressional Record: April 13, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
The assistant legislative clerk read the nomination of Rodney A.
Coleman, of Michigan, to be an Assistant Secretary of the Air Force.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia [Mr. Nunn].
Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, I thank the majority leader for bringing up
this nomination. It has been pending now for about a month. It was
reported out on March 10.
I am pleased that we are going to be able to bring this to the Senate
for action today.
Mr. President, on the 26th of January of this year, President Clinton
nominated Mr. Rodney A. Coleman, of Michigan, to serve as the Assistant
Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower, Reserve Affairs,
Installations, and Environment. As is the case with all nominations for
positions in the Department of Defense, Mr. Coleman's nomination was
referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
Within the Committee on Armed Services, Mr. Coleman's fitness to
serve in this key position was carefully reviewed. In accordance with
normal committee procedures, Mr. Coleman provided written answers to a
number of very pertinent policy questions. These questions addressed
the duties and responsibilities of the position for which he is
nominated, his qualifications to execute those duties and
responsibilities, and a number of specific policy issues affecting the
U.S. Air Force. Mr. Coleman's answers were carefully reviewed by the
committee and I ask unanimous consent that they be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
February 18, 1994.
Hon. Sam Nunn,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your note of
congratulations on my selection by the President to serve as
Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower, Reserve
Affairs, Installations, and Environment.
Enclosed are the answers to your policy issue questions. I
appreciate the opportunity to submit my views in advance of
my confirmation hearing and look forward to appearing before
your committee to further discuss these important issues.
Sincerely,
Rodney A. Coleman.
Enclosures.
Advance Questions Submitted by Senator Nunn
defense reforms
Q. More than seven years have passed since the enactment of
the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization
Act of 1986 and the Special Operations reforms. I am reminded
that Admiral Crowe commented after enactment of the
legislation that it would take approximately six years for
full implementation.
Do you support full implementation of these reforms?
A. Yes.
Q. What do you consider to be the most positive
accomplishments of the legislation?
A. For the military departments, the Goldwater-Nichols act
clarified the responsibility to ``organize, train, and
equip'' to adequately support operators in the field. The Air
Force has used this focus on organizing, training, and
equipping to accomplish comprehensive restructuring of the
Air Force. If confirmed, I would have significant inputs on
organizing and training issues.
Q. What is your view of the extent to which these defense
reforms have been implemented thus far?
A. Coming from the private sector, I have not been involved
in executing these reforms. I have read articles in the
popular press and also previous testimony that credited part
of our success in the Gulf War to changes resulting from
Goldwater-Nichols. I noted that in his recent testimony
before this Committee, Dr. Perry cited such advancements as
clarifying the role of the Joint Staff and ensuring the
centralized management and support of the Special Operations
Forces. I attribute such improvements as evidence of good-
faith on the part of the Services and the Department of
Defense.
Q. Do you have any plans for further action to ensure
fuller implementation of these defense reforms in your area?
A. While I have no specific plans, as yet, I would look for
opportunities within my scope of responsibilities to support
the goals of that legislation.
Duties
Section 8014 of Title 10, United States Code provides that
the Assistant Secretaries of the Air Force shall perform such
duties and exercise such powers as the Secretary of the Air
Force may prescribe. As Assistant Secretary of the Air Force
for Manpower, Reserve Affairs, Installations and Environment
you would be a top leader and manager in the Air Force.
Assuming you are confirmed, what duties do you expect that
Secretary Widnall will prescribe for you?
A. If I am confirmed, I understand that Secretary Widnall
will assign me general responsibilities of providing
guidance, direction and oversight of all matters pertaining
to formulation, review and execution of plans, policies,
programs, and budgets relative to: (1) Military and civilian
personnel; (2) Manpower management programs and techniques;
(3) Anti-discrimination programs; (4) Reserve component
affairs; (5) Installations and Base Realignment and Closure
Issues; (6) Environment, safety, and occupational health; (7)
Air Force review and appeal boards; (8) Drug policy
oversight; and (9) Mobilization planning.
As the senior member of her team responsible for these
functions, I expect to provide counsel to her and represent
her in these areas in interactions with other government
officials and private organizations in matters of mutual
concern.
In carrying out these duties, what would be your
relationship to the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel
and Readiness, to the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for
Environmental Security, to the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Reserve Affairs?
A. I understand that the Secretary of Defense may designate
these levels of Department of Defense officials to exercise
authority, direction, and control over Air Force activities
within their realm of responsibility. I would plan to develop
open lines of communication with them on policy matters.
What background and experience do you possess that you
believe qualifies you to perform these duties?
A. I spent ten years on active duty in the United States
Air Force as a civil engineering officer. During this time, I
held responsible command positions implementing design and
construction programs at Air Force installations in the
United States and the Far East. I also was responsible for
commanding combat engineering troops in Vietnam. I have had
the opportunity to observe high-level decision-making while
serving as a White House Fellow assigned as a Special
Assistant to the Secretary of Interior. Immediately following
my military service, I served in the District of Columbia
government as executive assistant to the City Council
Chairman which gave me high level liaison with the Congress
and the White House on issues of mutual concern. I currently
am an executive in General Motors and have worked with
municipal governments throughout the United States on tax and
environmental issues as well as the closure of twenty nine
manufacturing plants affecting over 70,000 employees. I
believe that the breadth of this experience qualifies me for
the position to which I have been nominated.
Do you believe that there are any steps that you need to
take to enhance your expertise to perform these duties?
A. While I believe I have the general background to serve
as Assistant Secretary, I will need to familiarize myself
with specific issues and to develop working relationships
with specialists in the areas I would oversee.
Major Challenges
In your view, what are the major challenges confronting the
next Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower,
Reserve Affairs, Installations and Environment?
A. There is no lack of challenging opportunities facing the
next Assistant Secretary. Examples include the challenge of
determining the right mix (civilian/ military/contractor) of
resources in both active and reserve forces; smoothing the
way for the more diverse workforce of the future; continued
management of the military drawdown (including associated
base closure and environmental issues); and the integration
of the military health system with the national health-care
reform initiatives. All of these challenges must be handled
without losing sight that they are in support of the primary
role of providing mission ready forces.
Assuming you are confirmed, what plans do you have for
addressing these challenges?
A. These challenges are tough, usually requiring
interaction among groups within DoD, within the Executive
Branch, and with Congress. If confirmed, I plan to play an
active role in those interactions and to ensure that members
of my team are fully prepared to contribute positively to the
process.
most serious problems
Q. What do you consider to be the most serious problems in
the management of Air Force manpower? How do you intend to
deal with these problems, and what timetables would you
establish for each?
A. I believe that maintaining a qualified and motivated
workforce is essential. Recent years have seen large
reductions of military and civilian personnel. By the end of
the FYDP, military end strength will have declined 36% and
civilian strength 33% from FY86 levels. Even with the
programs that Congress has provided to cushion the impact,
this has been and continues to be a stressful time. My own
observations from my days as a junior captain during the
post-Vietnam drawdown and my experience in industry with
downsizing and consolidating facilities suggest to me that
the people who work in an organization must have confidence
that the senior leadership cares about them. We must keep
faith with those who have served and may have had their
careers curtailed as a result of the end of the Cold War. But
we also must ensure that the Air Force remains an attractive
career choice. Daily events reinforce the knowledge that the
Air Force is not having a ``going out of business sale.''
Secretary Widnall has a recurring theme in her presentations
of ``People First.'' If confirmed, I would hope to
demonstrate a sustained pattern of decisions supporting the
theme of ``People First.''
officer management issues
Q. In 1991, the methods used in the Air Force to select
officers for promotion attracted significant attention within
the Department of Defense and in the Senate. In fact,
deficiencies in the Air Force officer promotion system
prompted a major review by the Department of Defense of all
officer promotion systems in the Department. That review
resulted in a sweeping revision of the Department of Defense
directive (DoDDir 1320.12) governing officer promotion
selection boards and the means by which information is
provided to officer promotion boards.
Do you believe that the reforms required by the Department
of Defense directive have been implemented in the Air Force?
A. I am aware that the Air Force has issued guidelines
covering changes in the law regarding the conduct of
promotion boards and that senior leadership has directed that
promotion policies be open, understandable, and consistent. I
understand senior Air Force leadership has placed special
emphasis on compliance with pertinent legislation as well as
the DoD Directive. For example, the Secretary of the Air
Force conducts interviews of board presidents and selected
board members after they have conducted promotion boards.
In the absence of direct experience with these matters, I
believe the reforms have been implemented as required.
Q. To what extent does the officer corps of the Air Force
believe that the system used to promote officers to all
grades, including general officer grades, is fair and
impartial?
A. I can only speculate at this point. I want to believe
the great majority of officers have faith in the system and
its integrity. If confirmed, I will make every effort to
ensure the Air Force vigorously complies with the spirit and
letter of all relevant laws, DOD Directives and Air Force
regulations regarding officer promotions.
Q. Are you aware of the allegations surrounding recent
officer promotion boards at Hanscom Air Force Base? What
actions do you intend to take to preclude situations similar
to that at Hanscom Air Force Base from recurring elsewhere?
A. I am aware that there are allegations a single
individual used inappropriate procedures and considered non-
performance related information in his assessment of officers
in his organization. However, I am not aware of the details
and cannot comment on specific remedial actions. Specific
allegations of improper evaluation processes will be
investigated. If the rules were broken, the Air Force will
ensure ``due process'' and equitable treatment for affected
officers. The Air Force has already initiated an Air Force-
wide re-education effort focused towards commanders, senior
raters and personnel staffs on the fundamental tenets and
principles of the Officer Evaluation System.
Personnel Transition Initiatives
Q. Over the past several years, the Congress has provided
to the Secretaries of the Military Departments a number of
management authorities to facilitate the drawing down of
military personnel. Certainly, these authorities were
intended to ensure the continued readiness of the Armed
Forces both during and after the draw down.
How is the Air Force measuring the effectiveness and cost
effectiveness of its use of the authorities the Congress has
provided?
A. Congress has provided voluntary separation and early
retirement incentives, and it has authorized and funded a
Transition Assistance Program to facilitate the drawdown.
These incentive programs have been very useful in helping the
Air Force meet their drawdown force-level targets. Even with
those incentives, involuntary authorities have had to be
invoked in order to achieve military and civilian drawdown
goals to date. The Air Staff updates its monitoring system
weekly on this and provides a report to the Secretary.
Civil-Military Cooperative Action Program
Q. Section 1081 of the National Defense Authorization Act
Fiscal Year 1993 establishes the Civil-Military Cooperative
Action Program.
What specific do you have for giving our reserve forces,
particularly logistics or engineer units, the opportunity to
play a greater role in civil-military cooperation as they go
about performing their military missions?
A. The National Guard and Air Force Reserve have
opportunities to play a greater role in community improvement
cooperation programs as they go about performing their
military training and missions. Natural disasters such as the
floods in the mid-west, and the recent earthquake in
California highlight a need for the use of all our national
assets to bring quick response in the way of needed supplies
and assistance. Reserve Component personnel are already
actively engaged in numerous community cooperative program, I
plan to review all of the current projects with the idea of
assessing the ability of the Air Reserve Components to play
an even greater role in their contribution to the community
consistent with the criteria specified in Section 1081, and
coordinated with OUSD (Personnel & Peadiness). I note, and
agree with, Committee members' comments that worthwhile
community service project must not put military readiness at
risk.
Maintaining a Ready Force
Q. The military services were characterized as being hollow
during the late 1970s and early 1980s. Many readiness
problems during those years were directly related to manpower
problems.
What indicators or early warning signals would you
establish to protect against potential hollowness and
readiness problems in the Air Force?
A. Readiness is the first priority of the Secretary of
Defense and the Secretary of the Air Force. Dr. Widnall and
General McPeak recently announced that 1994 will be
designated the ``Year of Readiness'' and be an area of
special emphasis. If confirmed, I would expect to have a
significant role in establishing and implementing readiness
goals within my areas of responsibility.
Restructuring of the Air Forces Reserve Components
Q. On December 10, 1993, the Secretary of Defense announced
a major restructuring of the Reserve Components of the Army.
Although there are as of yet few details available regarding
this restructuring, it is clear that this restructuring
will dramatically affect the future capabilities of the
Army Guard and Reserve.
What effect, if any, do you believe this restructuring will
have on the Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard?
A. I do not see any significant effects on the Air National
Guard and Air Force Reserve resulting from the restructure of
the Army's reserve components.
Q. Do you believe that a restructuring of the Reserve
Components of the Air Force is needed?
A. The Air Reserve Components do not need a restructuring
such as the Army reserve components are currently undergoing.
The Air Force has long integrated its Guard and Reserve
components both in war plans and in day-to-day operations.
The Air Force does make force mix adjustments that may alter
missions of specific units. These force structure changes are
part of a continuous review process that ensures the Air
Reserve Components continue to provide the right capabilities
for the Total Force as mission requirements change.
Department of Defense Maintenance Depots
Q. The National Defense Authorization Act established a
Department of Defense Task Force to review a whole series of
issues in the area of depot maintenance in the military
services.
What role do you think that DOD maintenance depots play in
the overall logistics and readiness posture of the Air Force?
In your view, what role do the DOD maintenance depots play
in our overall industrial base capability? What do you think
is the proper balance between DOD depots and the private
sector for Air Force depot maintenance workload?
A. I understand the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force
for Manpower, Reserve Affairs, Installations & Environment,
does not have primary oversight responsibility for Air Force
logistics and maintenance depots. Logistics oversight
responsibility falls under the Assistant Secretary for
Acquisition. However, I fully support the task force. In my
base closure role, I also support the cross Service analysis
of defense depots being conducted as part of the Base Closure
95 process.
Relationship to Economic Security, Environmental and Logistics
Officials
Q. What will be your relationship to the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Economic Security, the Deputy Under
Secretary of Defense for Environmental Security, and the
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Logistics?
A. I expect to have a sound working relationship with the
Assistant Secretary and both of the Deputy Under Secretaries
in areas of mutual concern. In order to carry out my
statutory and assigned responsibilities, it will be necessary
for me to deal directly and frequently with these officials.
I will cooperate fully with them and their offices to achieve
efficient administration of the Department of Defense and to
carry out effectively the authority, direction, and control
of the Secretary of Defense.
Environmental Issues
Q. In your view, is the current funding level for the
Defense Environmental Restoration Account (DERA) adequate to
meet the full range of the Air Force's environmental clean-up
requirements?
A. Funding levels are adequate to clean up past problems at
installations, but not as quick a pace as the Air Force
desires. Current funding has allowed the Air Force to meet
legal requirements, but only through renegotiating longer
timeliness in some of the agreements.
Q. What priorities will you establish in the expenditure of
the Air Force's DERA funds and how would you go about doing
this?
A. DERA policy is established by OSC, and currently that
policy is to fund only legally mandated requirements; i.e.,
those sites where the Air Force either has a legal (signed
agreement) or statutory requirement, or to correct an
imminent threat to human health or the environment.
Q. What steps would you take to ensure that the Air Force
meets all of its legal obligations under existing
environmental agreements with EPA and the States?
A. I will continue to make environmental matters a top
priority in the Air Force. I will sustain the Air Force's
policy of funding the legally mandated requirements. I will
conduct periodic reviews and, as required, I will interject
myself to ensure problems are resolved promptly and the
program stays on track.
Q. The bulk of the Air Force's cleanup program is driven by
legally enforceable agreements with the EPA and the States.
There is some concern that there are contaminated sites not
covered by these agreements that present a greater risk to
the public health and safety than those covered by the
agreements. What sites has the Air Force identified that fit
into this category? How do you plan to address these sites?
What role will you play in ensuring that the Air Force
maintains an aggressive ``cradle-to-grave'' pollution
prevention program?
A. Sites that are not on installations with agreements
signed with the regulators but that score fairly high on our
risk models fit into this category. The Air Force is working
with OSD to change funding priorities from signed agreements
to a system that prioritizes based upon risk to health safety
and the environment. All Air Force sites are being
reassessed to determine their health safety and
environmental risks, and the nature of contaminants,
pathways and receptors. The Air Force is working with OSD
and the regulators to allow priorities to be based upon
reducing high and medium risk sites to low risk.
Q. In most instances, pollution prevention activities are
not legally mandated. An aggressive pollution prevention
program is necessary to eliminate new cleanup obligations,
and, in the long term, to reduce O&M costs. What role would
you play in ensuring that the Air Force implements pollution
prevention?
A. I will support a very active pollution prevention
program to eliminate contamination and reduce future
liabilities and costs. It is much more cost effective to
prevent a problem by changing a process or material before
use than to handle and dispose of it afterwards. Pollution
prevention will allow us to meet legal mandates with minimum
expense. Although not legally required, the Air Force treats
pollution prevention as a must pay bill. The Assistant
Secretary's office has oversight to ensure that pollution
prevention policies are being effectively implemented, and
that adequate funding is available. By emphasizing successes
the Air Force has achieved in pollution prevention and
continuing to be a strong advocate, I will keep pollution
prevention as a top priority. This commitment will allow the
Air Force to benefit from reduced compliance and cleanup
costs in the future, which will reduce the strain on the O&M
budget.
Q. Over the next two years, a number of major environmental
laws must be reauthorized, including the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
(CERCLA) and the Clean Water Act.
What role will you play in the reauthorization process for
these laws? What specific issues of importance to the Air
Force should be addressed in this reauthorization process?
A. In line with my environmental responsibilities I expect
to play an active role in reviewing and commenting on these
legislative items and helping to define the Air Force needs
on each piece of legislation. It will be important to me to
ensure that the process addresses the need of the Air Force
to reconcile the two, often competing, requirements of being
a good steward of the environment and maintaining a force
trained, resourced, and ready to defend the interests of the
United States.
Base Closure Issues
Q. The National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year
1994 contained a number of provisions designed to assist
local communities make the transition associated with base
closure. One of the provisions provided the Department of
Defense with the authority to transfer property at closing
bases at reduced or no cost to local communities pursuant to
regulations to be issued by DoD. These regulations would
establish criteria when such below-cost or no-cost transfers
are appropriate.
What role will the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force
(Manpower, Reserve Affairs, Installations, and Environment)
play in the development and implementation of these
regulations? What do you believe are the important issues
that should be addressed in these regulations?
A. Two offices that report to the Assistant Secretary have
roles here. The Deputy Assistant Secretary for Installation
is part of the Base Closure Implementation Steering Group
that is currently developing the implementing guidance for
the provisions of the Defense Authorization Act. The Air
Force Base Conversion Agency, the organization on the front
lines of redevelopment, is also involved in developing this
implementing guidance. I fully support the intent of this
legislation as well as the President's Five Part Plan to
Revitalize Base Closure Communities that was announced in
July 1993. Closing Air Force installations is difficult for
the local communities and for the Air Force because we have
developed close ties with those communities. I fully support
the objectives of the President's program: rapid
redevelopment and creation of new jobs.
Subsequently, Mr. Coleman met with members of the committee
individually and with selected staff. On February 24, the committee
held an open hearing to review a number of nominations including Mr.
Coleman's. Subsequent to that hearing on March 10, the Committee on
Armed Services reported his nomination to the Senate with a
recommendation that it be confirmed.
Mr. Coleman has superb credentials and is well suited to meet the
challenges of the position for which he has been nominated. Mr. Coleman
spent 10 years as an officer in the Air Force, during which he served
as an engineering officer. He was appointed by the President in 1970 as
a White House Fellow.
After leaving the Air Force, he served as the executive assistant to
the chairman of the District of Columbia City Council and as a
consultant to the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation.
In 1980, Mr. Coleman joined the General Motors Corp. as the director
of government relations for the central foundry division. In 1985, he
was promoted to the position of director, municipal government affairs
at General Motors headquarters. In 1990, he assumed his current
position as executive director, Urban and Municipal Affairs for the
General Motors Corp., where he is responsible for providing leadership
and counsel to the management of General Motors on municipal government
and minority group issues, nationwide. He has played a key role in the
process of downsizing the infrastructure of General Motors. He is
active nationally and locally in a number of civic and professional
organizations.
The position for which he has been nominated, the Assistant Secretary
of the Air Force for Manpower, Reserve Affairs, Installations and
Environment, is a key position in the Department of the Air Force
hierarchy. If confirmed and appointed, Mr. Coleman will be responsible
for providing to the Air Force guidance, direction, and oversight on
all matters pertaining to the plans, policies, programs, and budgets
concerning active, reserve, and civilian personnel and manpower
programs; antidiscrimination programs; installations, base realignment
and closure issues; environmental, safety and health concerns; and
mobilization planning. Mr. Coleman will play an important role in the
BRAC process within the Air Force, and his experience in General Motors
in this area will be very valuable to the Air Force.
From this abbreviated list of the responsibilities of the Assistant
Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower, Reserve Affairs,
Installations, and Environment, it is clear that this is a position
that has an important amount of influence on the personnel readiness,
quality of life, and stewardship of resources within the Air Force. As
such, it should not remain vacant without compelling justification,
especially in this time of force reductions and base closures.
Mr. President, the Committee on Armed Services has examined this
nomination and is satisfied that Mr. Coleman is the right person for
this position. I urge my colleagues to support this nomination.
I thank the Senator from Michigan for his stalwart assistance in this
nomination. He has been a help in all of these nominations, but
particularly the Coleman nomination. I thank him for his assistance.
Mr. LEVIN addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Akaka). The Senator from Michigan [Mr.
Levin], is recognized.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, let me first thank my good friend from
Georgia, and the majority leader, for bringing this nomination to the
floor. It has been pending over a month. Mr. Coleman is well suited to
this position for the reasons Senator Nunn mentioned. His work in the
Air Force, his experience in the Air Force, and then his work at
General Motors in governmental relations suits him well for this
position.
There are many challenges in this position, but one of the most
challenging is the closing of bases. We have been through that in
Michigan, and we know the problems. Mr. Coleman is particularly well
suited by his experience with General Motors and having to close
facilities, and the need to deal sensitively with all of the various
issues which arise when a facility is closed. You have a community that
has been injured, that needs to get back on its feet. You have
individuals who also have to be assisted when bases are closed. Mr.
Coleman is extremely well qualified for that part of this position, as
well as for the other aspects.
Again, I thank the majority leader and the Senator from Georgia, the
chairman of the Armed Services Committee for pursuing this nomination
to this point. I look forward to Mr. Coleman's confirmation.
Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. President, if there is no further debate on the
matter, I ask that the Chair put the question to the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is
on agreeing to the nomination.
The nomination was confirmed.
Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEVIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the President will be
notified on the nomination.
Mr. MITCHELL. I thank the distinguished chairman of the Armed
Services Committee and the distinguished Senator from Michigan.
We have now completed action on one of the three pending nominations
on which we could not previously obtain clearance. There are two
remaining and, at this moment, we are in a discussion with our
Republican colleagues, attempting to gain their clearance to permit us
to proceed with respect to the remaining two nominations.
It is my hope and expectation that I will be able to announce very
shortly a schedule with respect to those two nominations.
In the meantime, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
Senate return to legislative session and that there now be a period for
morning business with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10
minutes each.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________