There are a number of important reforms provided for in Goldwater-Nichols. Three that are particularly important are strengthening civilian control, more efficient use of defense resources, and improving the management and administration of the Department of Defense.

Yes, I agree with the goals of Goldwater-Nichols. They are as valid today as they were in 1986. In particular, it is important that the Services continue to focus on efficient use of available resources. I am fully committed to finding ways to gain greater efficiencies in installation management, logistics, and environmental programs.

At this time, I have not had an opportunity to consider whether changes to Goldwater-Nichols may be warranted. If confirmed as the ASA (IL&E), I will remain open to proposals within the Department that will increase the effectiveness of the organization and missions within my areas of responsibility. 

The organizational relationship between the ASA (IL&E) and the Under Secretary of the Army is defined by the Secretary of the Army. The Under Secretary is the Secretary of the Army’s principal civilian assistant and senior advisor. I will strive to establish a cooperative and open relationship with the Under Secretary and keep him informed of significant issues.

Each of the Assistant Secretaries of the Army has clear duties and responsibilities that are prescribed in the Secretary’s General Order. In fulfilling my duties and exercising my authorities as the ASA (IL&E), I intend to work closely with the other Assistant Secretaries. For example:

• I will work closely with the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Research, Development and Acquisition) on improving and streamlining procurement practices for services and systems related to my functional areas of responsibility.
• I will work closely with the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller) on ways to improve financial management systems within my functional areas. I am particularly interested in working with the ASA (FM&C) to develop initiatives that will maximize the full potential of the Army’s real property assets.
• I will work closely with the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) to find ways to continue to improve the quality of services and support to our soldiers and their families -- in particular, cooperative development and implementation of innovative approaches to providing quality housing and communities that will meet the Army’s long term needs.
• I will work closely with the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) on relationships involving the Army Corps of Engineers, which serves both offices, and on matters involving the management and disposal of real estate.

The General Counsel is the chief legal advisor to the Army Secretariat. I intend to continue, and further strengthen, the close working relationship with the General Counsel. I understand the importance of ensuring that legal requirements are fully considered in carrying out my responsibilities.

As a consequence of my service on a Navy Housing Task Force in 1996-97, I became familiar with the installations, logistics and environment policies and practices of the Navy and Marine Corps, and established a strong working relationship with the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (I&E). I will continue that close and cooperative relationship. I also hope to develop a similar working relationship with my counterpart in the Air Force. In both cases, I expect to learn and incorporate their best management practices within the Army, while sharing the Army’s lessons learned with the other Services.

At this stage, I have not had the opportunity to examine whether redundancies exist between the two positions. I understand that there is precedent within the Army for consolidating certain functions such as these. For example, the Offices of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller) and the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Research, Development and Acquisition) both operate on a consolidated basis. If confirmed, I will assess cooperatively with the ACSIM whether there are similar opportunities, consistent with the tenets of Goldwater-Nichols, to realize greater efficiencies by consolidating functions in the ASA (IL&E) and ACSIM offices. Additionally, I will explore the feasibility of privatizing specific functions that can be more efficiently performed by the private sector through contracting or privatization.

From my participation on the Navy Housing Task Force, I concluded that the legislation enabling privatization initiatives within DoD and the military services was well-conceived and provides an effective mechanism to leverage the Military Services limited resources, thereby increasing the availability and quality of family housing for Service Members and their families. I believe that privatization will prove to be the most effective and affordable method of revitalizing the Army’s large and aging family housing stock and providing essential new housing. I know that there is enormous interest among the Nation's leading developers in partnering with the Army in this program. Further, in my judgement, it will be essential to approach housing issues with a broad-based program perspective concerned with long-term development and management of Army communities -- not simply the construction of housing units. Army communities, like civilian communities, include all of the facilities and services that accommodate and support soldiers and their families. I understand that there are a number of legal, procedural, and organizational issues that must be addressed in out-sourcing or privatizing functions within Army communities. My goal is to develop appropriate program strategies to more effectively use scarce department resources and to improve the quality of life for our soldiers.

The United Kingdom, Australia and Canada have adopted privatization as a mainstream strategy to meet their military family housing needs. The United Kingdom sold part of its family housing inventory and leased the housing units back from the purchaser. Most experts agree that this initiative has improved both the availability and quality of family housing while reducing its overall cost to the government. Australia created a Defense Housing Authority (DHA) as a public-private enterprise to revitalize, build, operate and maintain its military housing. While the DHA is a government corporation, it has the freedom and flexibility to operate as a private business, somewhat like public development corporations and state housing finance agencies in the US. I understand that the DHA has made significant progress in solving military housing problems through its public-private partnerships by using a variety of conventional real estate development and financing measures such as asset sales, limited partnerships, sale-leasebacks, and planned unit development structures.

The civilian community generally perceives the base closure process as the only effective and fair method of converting the military’s excess infrastructure to beneficial civilian reuse. Moreover, studies show that in most cases significant tangible and intangible benefits accrue to local communities from base closures over time. However, because the processes of real estate disposals, transfers and environmental cleanup take time and usually involve significant community investment, the public often is unable to immediately appreciate the full benefits to be realized from the base closure. We must work to correct this perception.

The Department of Defense has done an excellent job in disposing of properties in a manner that promotes job creation and community planned redevelopment. If confirmed, I would like to work to further these goals by finding ways to further expedite the transfer of properties for beneficial reuse and the lease of property pending transfer. In particular, I would like to explore how the Army might borrow certain commercial real estate practices to improve the real estate disposal process. Additionally, I would like to assess how further privatization might benefit the Army in real estate disposal and environmental remediation, as well as in other areas within the responsibility of the ASA (IL&E). Finally, I would like to develop ways for the Army to fully capitalize on the significant tangible and intangible economic and social values associated with the Army’s large inventory of historic properties.

Yes. I agree that BRAC savings are vital to maintaining readiness and modernizing the armed forces for the Twenty-first Century. I also believe that a portion of these savings should be dedicated to the revitalization of family housing and community facilities that improve the quality of life for soldiers and their families. These savings must be spent wisely as part of a long-term investment strategy to ensure that the Army’s future program needs are met. In the absence of such a strategy, the savings are likely to be fully consumed by short-term program needs at the expense of fundamental long-term needs.

I understand that the Army generally has sufficient personnel resources to meet its mission requirements in the real estate and financial management areas. The Army’s real estate career program and other personnel programs have proved instrumental in ensuring an adequately trained workforce. However, the Army may benefit from the lessons learned by major American companies in evaluating their personnel requirements -- it is essential to first define the ultimate performance objectives of the business before determining the appropriate balance between personnel levels and systems that are needed for optimum performance. For example, one major company out-sourced its lease administration and property billing function to a major real estate services firm, thereby saving significant overhead costs, tightening financial and management controls, and providing better information for long-term planning.

The Army’s real estate career and other personnel programs provide trained professionals to meet current and future staffing requirements. In addition, contingency real estate support teams provide trained professionals to support deployed forces to assist in national emergencies. I will examine these programs for opportunities to make improvements and to apply commercial practices and concepts to better meet the Army’s real estate and business management needs.

I am committed to sustaining readiness and quality of life within the Army Reserve and National Guard. The concept of parity is now embodied in the development process of the Army’s installation programs. I understand that the Active and Reserve Components receive equal treatment in the funding process, with each component determining requirements based on the same methodology. Moreover, each component is represented on each of the main decision making bodies involved in the planning and budget process: Program Evaluation Group, Program Budget Committee, and the Army Resource Board.

Yes.

I have not examined the issue of raising the contract threshold, and would have to look at the impact of various contract cost levels before making a recommendation. I understand that this is a sensitive issue, which bears thorough analysis and considered judgment.

Yes. The Army’s environmental objectives are driven by law, regulation, effective stewardship and sound management. To meet these objectives, I will identify and emphasize those measures that increase efficiencies and lead to improved program results. My goal will be to better integrate environmental considerations into the decision-making process for Army programs, such as weapon systems development and facilities design and construction. I will focus on new technologies to reduce or eliminate pollution from military operations and improved planning and management to reduce the impact on our natural and cultural resources. Additionally, the total life cycle costs for the Army’s environmental programs should be identified to promote more effective decision-making and budgeting for future years. This will lead to better planning and program implementation, allowing us to leverage our resources and reduce program costs. Finally, I intend to work closely with the Congress to ensure that the costs and impacts of proposed environmental legislation are fully considered in the legislative process.

I am a strong believer in using information technology, advanced analytical methods, and case research in solving current and future problems. As an example of the type of initiatives that I will support, I understand that the Office of the ASA (IL&E) initiated two major initiatives in cooperation with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research, Development and Acquisition to better identify and prioritize science and technology needs and to minimize environmental impacts and costs associated with Army systems. The primary purpose of both initiatives was to ensure that Army programs remain on schedule, within budget, and meet performance objectives. In general, my leadership goals will be to ensure that the best science, technology and analytical methods are employed to reduce operational costs and improve performance in all programs within my areas of responsibility. I also intend to maintain appropriate oversight of activities within these areas of responsibility to ensure that technology is fully exploited to meet program objectives and mission requirements, and to guarantee that funding for these activities is focused and appropriately allocated to that end.

I will continue to closely cooperate with the State of Colorado, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the local community, and Shell Oil Corporation in carrying out the RMA cleanup. In addition, I will seek to find ways to accelerate the cleanup within available resources in coordination with the newly hired private-sector Project Manager.

The ASA (IL&E) should support the Army’s efforts to develop and evaluate contaminant data, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, to determine the environmental impacts of military training activities at MMR and to minimize the impacts on Army training.

The Army appears to be making excellent progress in cleaning up BRAC properties and making them available for community reuse on an expedited basis. The Army is working very effectively with local communities to identify properties suitable for immediate reuse and focusing resources on the actions needed to complete the necessary cleanup and accomplish the transfer. Under the Army’s current process, the Army establishes BRAC environmental teams, including EPA and state regulators, to cooperatively plan and implement the base cleanup as consistent with the community’s reuse plan. Additionally, a Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) is also established at each BRAC installation to integrate a broad spectrum of community interests into the base cleanup process. Finally, I understand that the Army has worked closely with communities on an individual basis to effectively use the new economic development conveyance authority to effect the quick and smooth transition of BRAC property to beneficial civilian reuse. I will continue to make good use of this authority, as well as other authorities, to ensure the rapid transfer of our BRAC property in support of job creation and economic redevelopment.

I will focus on policy guidance that emphasizes the need for rapid remediation and transfer to BRAC properties in support of the President’s BRAC Fast Track Initiative. I will prioritize actions and programs that maximize the use of the Army’s limited resources to rapidly remediate and transfer that property best suited for community reuse. I also will consider innovative approaches to remediation and transfer that will facilitate redevelopment, such as the use of buyer conducted cleanups, where reasonable and acceptable to the community; the use of new early transfer authority under Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) in appropriate cases; and the use of institutional controls that allow for the cost effective and rapid reuse of military property.

I understand that while progress has been made in the FUDS program, there is room for improvement. The program still has many sites for which preliminary assessments have not been completed. As a result, it has been difficult to develop accurate cost-to-complete estimates for individual cleanups within the FUDS program, which impairs the effective administration of the program as a whole and the prompt completion of individual cleanup projects. Additionally, the FUDS program provides unique challenges for the Army and DoD; the Army is not the owner of the property subject to cleanup, complicating access and project administration; and FUDS cleanup funds must be used to cleanup ordnance and explosives, as well as traditional contaminants. Given these constraints, I will look for opportunities for further improvements in administration and funding of this important program.

I will pursue the prompt development of a business plan for the FUDS program. This business plan will establish clear cleanup goals and performance measures, and identify strategic options that might be pursued. For example, FUDS sites might be aggregated, competed and privatized in a separate program with its own funding. These cleanup goals and performance measures will take into account available resources, private sector capabilities and the use of the best available technology.

There are three major challenges in managing IL&E. First, the Army needs to move forward aggressively in reducing and realigning its infrastructure to match its requirements into the Twenty-first Century. By removing unneeded buildings and land, the chain of overhead and support costs that are associated with them will also be eliminated or substantially reduced. While the Army has made progress as a result of the last four BRAC rounds, it still must operate and maintain too much out-dated and excess infrastructure, which is a drain on the Army’s limited resources and a major impediment to its ability to modernize the force. As many large companies have discovered, the "hidden" costs associated with maintaining aging, unneeded facilities can quickly exceed the value of the facilities themselves. Second, the Army faces a major ongoing challenge in its effort to meet mission requirements and provide for the quality of life for soldiers and their families in this era of diminishing resources. The challenge will be for the Army to continue find innovative ways to optimize its resources, such as the judicious privatization of certain functions that can be performed more economically or more expertly by the private sector. Third, the Army needs to strive to achieve more efficient and cost effective remediation of its properties. This could be accomplished through use of new technologies, more effectively prioritizing our cleanup process, and leveraging resources that are readily available in the private sector.

I will quickly formulate an action plan to effectively address these challenges. In developing this plan, I intend to combine the wealth of knowledge and experience available in the private-sector with the expertise and resources available within the Army. I anticipate that this action plan will have seven elements: (1) leveraging the value of the Army’s vast real estate holdings to enhance the accomplishment of the Army’s missions; (2) ensuring that the quality of life for soldiers and their families is a primary consideration in the decision-making processes related to installation planning and management; (3) integrating education and incentives for pollution prevention and environmental awareness into decision making at all levels to reduce future environmental costs and meet the Army’s stewardship responsibilities; (4) developing analytical and accounting methods for better identifying and calculating the life cycle costs of environmental compliance and pollution prevention; (5) fully integrating into the decision-making process the life cycle costs associated with major weapon system procurement and facility acquisitions; (6) developing improved property management methodologies to maximize the beneficial use of Army properties; and (7) partnering with the regulatory community, the public, and commercial stakeholders in planning and executing the Army’s real estate, logistics and environmental programs.

With shrinking budgets, it will continue to be a major problem for the Army to achieve an effective balance between the quality of life for Army soldiers and their families, force sustainment, and the necessary modernization to build an effective Army for the future. Moreover, it will be a continuing challenge for the Army to achieve the optimum balance among the competing tools available to meet these needs, such as private sector performance of functions, use of the many emerging technologies, and the development of innovative government programs.

I will begin by immediately assessing the exact nature and full scope of the problems and challenges that the Army faces within the ASA (IL&E) area of responsibility. I will next formulate specific programs, using all available resources and expertise within the Department and private sector. In particular, I will make every effort to enhance the Army’s ability to meet its challenges through such means as process, program and system re-engineering, out-sourcing or privatization of functions, and organizational streamlining based on the priorities and workloads associated with each program. In developing and implementing these programs, I look forward to working closely with Congress, other members of the Executive Branch and affected interests.

During the past 35 years, I have been privileged to work with the senior executives of more than 80 major corporations, financial institutions and government entities in improving organizational performance through long-term strategies and resource management plans, and in re-engineering their processes, systems and operations to better meet mission requirements. Earlier, I was schooled in business management, public policy and real estate. This combination of education, experience and skills will provide a solid foundation to support the Secretary of the Army and other officials in the responsibilities of this office. Equally important, from my first introduction to the Army as an ROTC cadet, I have long held a personal belief that the Army is one of this Nation’s most important institutions, not only in defending our national interests and in maintaining world peace, but in exemplifying the very best qualities of professionalism, personal and institutional integrity, management innovation, and respect for our National heritage. I have volunteered for this position to help the Army's leadership reinforce and extend its past, present and potential contributions to the Nation.

If confirmed by the Committee, I plan to utilize the expertise of the Army's military and civilian workforce, supplemented by independent advice from standing groups such as the Army Science Board, the Institute for Defense Analyses, and from private sector organizations. For most of the major issues discussed above, I would utilize a multi-disciplinary project team or task force approach drawing on expertise in IL&E, other Army Secretariat organizations, DoD and outside organizations as appropriate. As a career consultant and entrepreneur, I learned many years ago to seek the best talent available both in employees and in advisors to supplement and enhance my personal experience and expertise. I have organized and led more than 400 multi-disciplinary project teams throughout my business and professional career, and I would expect to follow the same approach in this position.

Yes.