Answer: Absolutely. The Goldwater-Nichols Act was a much needed and very timely piece of transition legislation for our military. The issues articulated in the Act were real. Pre Goldwater-Nichols, insufficient JCS review, oversight of contingency planning, unclear chains of command, and inadequate attention to both the quality and training of officers assigned to joint duty hampered the efficient employment of our Armed Forces.

Answer: Since 1986, the Joint Staff, the Unified Commands, and the Services have vigorously pursued the intent of the Goldwater-Nichols Act. Today, the corporate advice provided by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is detailed, meaningful, timely, and extremely influential. Our civilian leadership trusts that our armed forces can and will carry out our assigned missions in the most effective and cost efficient manner possible. The strategic planning, contingency planning, theater engagement planning, crisis response activities, programs and budgets of the Unified Commands and the services are in sync with the National Security Strategy and are based upon realistic combat and support force projections. Lastly, there has been an exponential leap in the quality and education of the personnel assigned to the various joint staffs. The Services now realize that joint experience is an absolute necessity in the career progression of its best and brightest officers and are resolutely filling their joint billet allocations with the same.

Answer: The most important aspect of these defense reforms has been the demonstrated improvement in the joint warfighting capabilities of the United States Armed Forces. Over the past twelve years, the Goldwater-Nichols Act has given us a focus on joint doctrine, joint professional military education, and coordinated military planning . Chains of command have been clarified from the National Command Authority all the way down to individual on-scene commanders. Today, our Combatant Commanders clearly understand their planning, training and execution responsibilities. Equally important, they understand that their ability to articulate their equipment resource needs and priorities weighs heavily in the services’ POM inputs and the overall Department of Defense fiscal planning effort.

Answer: Yes, I strongly agree with and support these goals. I base this upon the armed forces’ performance in the numerous contingencies that have arisen since passage of the Goldwater-Nichols Act…typified by the synchronized strategy and tactical maneuvering which characterized Desert Shield and Desert Storm…and my personal experiences on the Joint Staff and HQ USAF. I also firmly believe that the Department of Defense has aggressively and resolutely stepped up to meet these goals.

Answer: I am aware of a number of proposals, past and present, to realign the current Combatant Command structure and to decrease the number of joint billets on the various staffs. Budgetary constraints, combined with a dynamic world security environment are driving us to look at restructuring as one means of maintaining our global military dominance. Studies such as the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), the Defense Reform Initiatives, Management Reform Memoranda and ongoing Joint Staff strategic planning efforts are shaping what the future military will look like, not only in terms of combat capability, but also in terms of force structure, equipment, etc. Based on the outcome of these studies, the Goldwater-Nichols Act may require amending, and some reshaping of the combatant command structure.

Answer: USTRANSCOM and its components have an aggressive information systems configuration management process that ensures compliance with applicable DOD joint interoperability regulations and initiatives. USTRANSCOM is exploiting World-Wide Web technology in a variety of ways to improve transportation planning and operations. The warfighter should be able to rapidly access these systems and receive accurate information over the WWW with nothing more than a laptop computer and a telephone line. To ensure that the information on USTRANSCOM systems is always available when needed and that it remains secure and uncorrupted, it also maintains an aggressive security posture. Computer firewalls with real-time intruder alerting features and a reliable Anti-virus program protect the data and ensure decision makers are provided with the proper information at the right time. USTRANSCOM’s Global Transportation Network (GTN) is the Crown Jewel of Defense Transportation Command, Control, Communications, and Computer Systems (C4S). Both DOD and commercial information systems feed GTN which allow it to act as the central information umbrella for all DOD transportation activities and the central DOD platform for intransit visibility (ITV). Effective use of ITV can markedly decrease shipping time, manpower requirements, and acquisition and transportation rehandling costs. It also helps maximize use of common-user lift assets and increase port throughput. The ability of these information systems to communicate with one another and to provide near real-time ITV will be one of the true hallmarks of "focused logistics" as we enter the 21^st Century.

Answer: While the Mobility Requirements Study (MRS) Bottoms Up Review Update (BURU) assumed sufficient overseas infrastructure, including airfields and seaports, to conduct strategic deployment, several important airfields have closed since the completion of that study. Past and present demands have strained the remaining facilities and raised questions about the sufficiency of the overseas air mobility infrastructure. USTRANSCOM will specifically assess en route sufficiency for air mobility in MRS 05. Meanwhile, USTRANSCOM has focused its most important current infrastructure concerns on recapitalization of runways, ramps, and fuel systems at en route airfields. In keeping with the findings of a recent Joint Staff study, as well as USTRANSCOM’s En Route Studies, USTRANSCOM has worked with USEUCOM, USPACOM, and DLA to develop recapitalization plans. For example, DLA has allocated 80% of their fuels MILCON FY00-05 POM to en route projects.  

Sealift Capacity. The MRS BURU requirement for the Surge Sealift Fleet is 10.0M sq. ft. by FY01. There is currently 7.1M sq. ft. of capacity, leaving a 2.9M sq. ft. shortfall. The most critical element in the overall program is the acquisition of the Large Medium Speed Roll-on/Roll-off (LMSR) ship. The LMSRs being fielded to the Surge Fleet will allow USTRANSCOM to retire Ready Reserve Force (RRF) breakbulk vessels, which are both less-capable and more costly to maintain.

Despite the success of the LMSR program, even when it is fully fielded, USTRANSCOM will still be 550K sq. ft. short of the MRS BURU requirement. Examining alternatives, there is the potential to add approximately two ships worth of militarily useful area (200K sq. ft) through the expansion of existing Roll-On/Roll-Off vessels. These expansion projects are funded in the FYDP. However, this still leaves a 350K sq. ft. shortfall of the validated requirement. Acquisition of this remaining capacity remains an issue which USTRANSCOM is actively working. 

Airlift Capacity. USTRANSCOM identified Global Air Traffic Management (GATM), KC-135 PACER CRAG avionics modernization, and Material Handling Equipment as modernization shortfalls during the FY 99-03 budget process.

 GATM provides required aircraft equipment upgrades and improvements, consisting of advanced communications, navigation, and surveillance (CNS) equipment, to enable aircraft to operate in a new airspace environment which relies more on space-based, vice land-based navigation facilities. USTRANSCOM identified a comprehensive requirement for the air mobility fleet of $2.4B which was only partially funded for some weapon systems for a total of $573.2M. Although they received nearly $1 billion in plus-ups, significant shortfalls remain for the C-5, C-130 and OSA aircraft.  

The KC-135 modernization shortfall was fully funded during the FY99-03 FYDP. KC-135 modernization included the installation of PACER CRAG cockpits, providing a state of the art avionics package for these aircraft.  

USTRANSCOM attempted to restore funding lost in the FY97 budget process for the 60K Tunner loader. The program’s progress continues to improve; however, the funding shortfall has continued into the current cycle. $40.3M is required in the out years to procure the required loaders.  

In addition, since the end of the FY99-03 cycle, a number of modernization shortfalls have surfaced which USTRANSCOM is working in the current cycle, including C-5 airframe and avionics modernization, and aircraft defensive systems.

Answer: If confirmed, my funding priority for these shortfalls, unchanged from the current CINCTRANS priorities, follows:

- Global Air Traffic Management

Answer: My proposed priorities are based on the unique needs of the defense transportation system. Self protection for air mobility units is a top priority, but maintaining access to optimum airspace and airways, sealift capacity, and handling equipment necessary for rapid force deployment worldwide are even more essential.

Answer: I believe the present process by which CINCTRANS provides input to the budget request system is adequate. Currently, the Services provide an excellent level of scrutiny and review during the Planning, Programming and Budgeting System (PPBS) process, while providing significant advocacy and oversight for key transportation programs. CINCTRANS has the "checkbook" for USTRANSCOM Defense Transportation System (DTS)-related initiatives, which provides him the capability to proactively initiate and fund DTS improvements. .

Answer: Prior to Desert Shield/Desert Storm, USTRANSCOM’s formal mission was wartime only. During Desert Shield, the Command and its components identified a number of problems with the transition from peace to war. Since February 92, TRANSCOM has been the Single Manager for the Defense Transportation System during Peace and War. Today, they are operating as a fully integrated, efficient and effective Transportation system. However, there still are challenges: 

Early access to Reserve forces is necessary to begin the strategic flow of manpower and equipment to rapidly deploy combat forces. Reserve forces work every day with their active duty counterparts at both the Headquarters and at the Component level as members of a fully integrated team. Early mobilization of USTRANSCOM reservists is critical to move the force. 

In a similar vein, federally employed civilians and civilian contractors make up a significant portion of the USTRANSCOM team (virtually 100% of USTRANSCOM's sealift capability is provided by contract employees). The CINC must be assured that these individuals remain responsive in a wartime scenario. The challenge also is to manage change orders and changes in work conditions, arising out of a shift to a contingency environment, so as to prevent disruption in services or undue cost to the government.

Answer: USTRANSCOM manages the Army afloat prepositioned ships through a Memorandum of Agreement. Military Sealift Command (MSC), as a component of USTRANSCOM, carries out those management duties. MSC also manages Marine Corps prepositioning, but as a component of the Navy. As such, MSC and USTRANSCOM constantly work with their DOD partners and customers to ensure the highest quality service is provided. And, in fact, several important changes are taking place in afloat prepositioning. Eight Large Medium Speed Roll-on Roll-off (LMSRs) ships are being phased in to the Army prepositioning ships program; USMC is adding 1 ship to each MPSRON, and USAF is moving to containerization of prepositioned ammunition…recently replacing one of their prepo vessels with a container ship.

Answer: Assessments of the sufficiency of CONUS and overseas ports and airfields to support strategic mobility are highly "scenario dependent." Overseas, whether mobility supports a small-scale contingency or a major theater war (MTW), our forces require access to host nation ports and airfields. In some cases – particularly for the air mobility en route system – our forces require friendly nation airfield resources at locations that may or may not be directly involved in the contingency (for example, any US response in Southwest Asia will require air mobility en route basing in Europe and will usually require access to peripheral Gulf State airfields as well). USTRANSCOM should continue to work with the geographic CINC’s to ensure the Strategic Mobility requirements for overseas ports and airfields are met in planning for the total range of conflict. The Command should also continue to support the Army and Navy in the development of a Joint Logistics Over-the-Shore capability for those scenarios where fixed port facilities are degraded or denied by enemy forces. 

In CONUS, I believe constraints in the availability of ports and airfields for the most demanding MTW requirements are being adequately addressed. The Army Strategic Mobility Program should improve key installations, ammunition depots and ports - -including rail, airfield, and staging area upgrades, West coast containerized ammunition port facility improvements, and other installation-specific projects. Also, the National Port Readiness Network is functioning to dialogue and plan with DOT and the nation’s commercial port industry to ensure wartime requirements can be met in order to minimize our permanent presence at commercial ports. 

Finally, the present inventory of aircraft loaders, called Material Handling Equipment (MHE), used at aerial ports for on- and offloading US military and Civil Reserve Airlift Fleet aircraft is currently very old and unreliable. That said, I believe the new Air Force 60K loader and Next Generation Small Loader (NGSL) programs will provide the equipment needed to meet future MHE requirements.

Answer: C-5 reliability, maintainability and availability (RM&A) performance has continued to decline since FY91, despite significant management attention and modification initiatives designed to reverse the trend. Inherent design limitations in C-5 subsystems associated with 1960s’ technology cannot be overcome without a complete modernization effort. In regards to the health of the TF-39 engine, AMC has transitioned to three levels of maintenance by establishing engine regional repair centers at Travis and Dover AFBs, to increase engine overhaul capacity. While these management actions have helped to recover from a critically short spare engine level, they have failed to significantly affect the decline in C-5 performance. In response, AMC has developed a comprehensive plan to both meet GATM requirements and to upgrade RM&A performance on the C-5 to acceptable levels. The plan consists of three major efforts: Upgrade of the C-5 engine’s High Pressure Turbine, modernization of C-5 cockpit avionics, and re-engining of the entire C-5 fleet.

The TF-39 engine High Pressure Turbine (HPT) suffers from turbine blade erosion. It is the leading cause of engine removals and is the leading culprit in an extremely low time on wing (TOW) – less than 1,200 hours, compared to TOW for commercial aircraft of 8,000-12,000 hours. HPT replacement allows increased turbine operating temperatures and will more than double the TOW…not optimum compared to our commercial counterparts, but certainly a tremendous low cost, short term improvement. HPT is a relatively inexpensive, fast-payback program, significantly reducing engine flying hour costs. Current costs are only $256K per engine, and payback occurs in only 3.5 years. In the long term, however, it does not address the majority of the reliability problems in the TF-39. Again, this is almost exclusively a consequence of outdated engine technology.

The Avionics Modernization Program (AMP) includes upgrading avionics to GATM compliance, improving navigation and safety equipment, and installing a new autopilot. This equipment includes upgraded global positioning system (GPS) receivers, a new traffic alert and collision avoidance system (TCAS), and new ground collision avoidance hardware. The AMP also replaces an extremely unreliable autopilot with highly reliable digital technology. This will provide a tenfold increase in reliability.

The third step of this comprehensive C-5 modernization plan is re-engining…a program which includes new engines, pylons, and auxiliary power units, with upgrades to aircraft skin and frame, landing gear, and the pressurization system. Replacing the aging TF-39 engine fleet with a commercial-off-the-shelf engine will substantially increase C-5 reliability. Studies have validated that re-engining will increase RM&A to acceptable levels, with substantial increases in aircraft availability and on-time departure reliability. Additional benefits which accrue with re-engining are a 22% increase in thrust (along with some corresponding increase in wartime mission throughput), a reduction in fuel consumption, and Stage III engine noise compliance.

Answer: None of our other aircraft have the magnitude of the problems which currently face the C-5 nor, as a consequence, are there any with the potential for having such a dramatic impact on the Defense Transportation System. That said, we need to address the modernization of our C-130 fleet as it gets older.  

Answer: USTRANSCOM is not delaying C-5 modernization. They, through their air component Air Mobility Command (AMC), are following an aggressive three-step program to upgrade the C-5. The HPT upgrade is currently in production with over 60 engines already modified, and they are looking for ways to increase the economic benefit of the program by accelerating the modifications. The Air Force begins C-5 avionics modernization in earnest this year,and has asked industry for bids to accomplish the modification. They expect a contract to be awarded by late summer, on a schedule driven by GATM airspace timelines. To address the third step of comprehensive modernization, AMC has brought forward a C-5 re-engining program in its FY00-05 POM initiative. While the outcome of the POM is still not determined, USTRANSCOM is confident the problem will be addressed consistent with funding availability.

Answer: Airlift assets to support combat forces during two major theater wars (MTWs) were identified during the March 1995 Mobility Requirements Study Bottom-Up Review Update (MRS BURU). For airlift, the requirement was determined to be 49.7 Million Ton Miles per Day, (MTM/D), 70% of which is oversized and outsized cargo during the halting phases of the MTWs. Once that requirement was established, AMC and the Air Force took programmatic action to achieve that baseline airlift capability by FY2006. Currently, there is a deficit of about 3.3 MTM/D in outsize and oversize cargo delivery capability. In the near term, to ensure support for the combat forces, the US Air Force has accelerated the procurement of C-17s, increased early availability of CRAF Stage I and II, increased the use of the KC-10 in an airlift role, and made "school house" aircraft available to the warfighter. In the long term, additional C-17s beyond the current buy of 120 will be needed to support the special operations missions and airdrop requirements currently being handled by the retiring C-141. Finally, completion of the C-5 modernization initiatives described earlier will be essential in order to maintain the weapon system as a responsive and reliable airlifter. If confirmed as CINCTRANS, the timely fulfillment of these last two requirements will certainly be among my highest priorities. 

The Sealift requirement is for 4.3M square feet of prepositioning and 10M square feet of surge sealift capability. Currently, USTRANSCOM is acquiring 19 Large Medium Speed Roll-on Roll-off (LMSR) ships. By FY00, eight LMSRs will support Army prepositioning and when combined with the USMC MPSRONS, USTRANSCOM will reach their 4.3M square foot prepositioning requirement. The other 11 LMSRs will add approximately 3M square feet to the surge fleet bringing the total surge capability to 9.45M square feet. MARAD has started expansion projects on several of the existing ships to add an additional (approximately) 200K square feet, leaving a 350K square foot shortfall of the 10M square foot requirement. USTRANSCOM is currently looking at ways to solve this shortfall without the acquisition of more vessels. Options include better utilization of the space available on prepositioning LMSRs, possibly changing the mix of LMSRs in prepo and surge to maximize the space available, as well as looking to our commercial partners via the Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement (VISA) to supply part of the surge lift capacity that must be ready to load on day 10.

Answer: Unless corrective measures can be taken to address the C-5 problems, we will face serious challenges in meeting the airlift requirements base-lined in MRS BURU. The MRS BURU assumed a healthy C-5 fleet. Our history with the C-5 has proven it to be much less reliable than forecast in that study, and even that historical reliability continues to decline. However, the command will use the results from MRS-05 to reevaluate all airlift requirements. This upcoming MRS analysis will be different from the previous MRS BURU study in that the assumptions will be far more realistic. The MRS-05 analysis will include weapons of mass destruction, asymmetric threats to the mobility system, and start with a posture of forces already engaged around the globe. There is little doubt that the future requirement will be more demanding with these more realistic assumptions, and it is very likely the mobility procurement budget will have to be increased to meet these future demands. 

For example, USTRANSCOM is currently looking at alternatives to get the C-5 fleet healthy. So far, the most cost-effective solution appears to be a comprehensive modernization effort that includes re-engining the C-5 with reliable and commercially available CF-6 turbofan engines. Along with some other component upgrades and modifications, the command believes they can improve the reliability of the C-5 fleet to deliver the MRS BURU levels of moderate risk but they would need to program just over $4.3B over the next decade to realize that goal.  

For Sealift, the first 18 (of 19) LMSRs have been funded and the 19^th is included in the FY99 budget. The MARAD expansion projects are in the current POM with scheduled completion in FY03. To date the National Defense Sealift Fund has had good support and enjoyed adequate funding. Providing this trend continues and the 350K square foot shortfall is solved, I expect our nation’s sealift requirement will be adequately met.

The CLASS demonstration program, as outlined in H.R. 3616, is significantly lacking in specifics and will take years to fully develop – the potential net effect being continued delay in addressing this major Quality of Life issue, while Service personnel continue to endure the unacceptable "status quo" program. 

CLASS is difficult to evaluate because it is silent on so many issues. However, I do have some concerns. 

Answer: First of all, I need to make clear that the Department of Defense has moved from purchasing "lowest cost" to an acquisition strategy that incorporates "best value". Best value means that, ultimately, it is OK to purchase a service at a somewhat higher cost if, in the end, that service will result in less damage, fewer claims, and satisfied customers. The MTMC Personal Property Pilot solicitation incorporates best value at its heart. I endorse the best value concept and will continue to do so in all my acquisitions. I am confident that the MTMC pilot will result in increased customer satisfaction (an important retention issue) and reduced claims for loss and damage. Other actions I will take, if confirmed, to improve the quality of moving services that service members receive will be to implement performance-based contracting. Recently, OMB endorsed performance-based service contracting as the federal government’s preferred method of acquiring services. They showed in their May 1998 study that performance-based service contracting enables agencies to obtain improved performance and reduced prices. The MTMC pilot is a performance-based contract. It allows the contractor to use his normal corporate business practices and also allows the government to choose the contractor it will use based on past performance. Furthermore, I will insist on receiving those same services that moving companies provide to their best corporate customers: full value protection on lost or damaged goods, customer service enhancements (24 hour, toll free numbers, intransit visibility), direct contact with the mover, payment to the member for inconvenience, etc. I will also ensure that my staff stays abreast of state of the art innovations in the moving industry and incorporates those innovations in our contracts.

Answer: In my view, in order to provide world-class support for the warfighting CINCs as well as meet the DOD’s peacetime transportation needs, we must have robust capability and readiness--now and in the future. While our current national military strategy demands we be able to provide strategic deployment and sustainment support for two near simultaneous major theater wars, we must also prepare ourselves for the future. The United States Transportation Command team plays a critical role in fulfilling the four operational concepts espoused in the Chairman’s Joint Vision 2010: dominant maneuver, precision engagement, full dimensional protection, and focused logistics. The challenges I see on the horizon for the Defense Transportation System (DTS) are: 

TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE While our nation’s infrastructure use is at record levels, our maintenance of this infrastructure remains below the necessary requirement. Fewer forward based forces means added reliance on deployment operations and transportation infrastructure. Additionally, our nation is even more dependent today on access rights to host nation facilities for contingency operations. Continued support for "fort to port" capability is needed.

COMMERCIAL PARTNERSHIPS The ability to rapidly expand our DTS during contingency operations lies squarely on the shoulders of our commercial partners. The tremendous success story of the Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) during DESERT SHIELD/DESERT STORM paved the way for its seafaring brother, VISA, the Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement. Both of these programs remain pillars of DOD’s lift capability. If confirmed, I will continue to work with our commercial partners to leverage their transportation capabilities to support Defense Transportation System demands.

COMMAND AND CONTROL Key to our success in the United States Transportation Command is the Global Transportation Network, a system that provides in-transit visibility (ITV) to the commander and allows real time management of critical transportation assets. GTN will provide my commanders leverage to dramatically improve their service to the warfighter.

IMPROVING THE EFFICIENCY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THE DTS Despite dramatic improvements in the efficiency in the DTS over the past several years, various criticisms of USTRANSCOM’s cost of operations persist. The March 1998 GAO draft report recognized that USTRANSCOM has taken action to improve customer service, reduce costs, and improve operational efficiency. However, the draft report fails to recognize the one very critical factor which makes any direct comparison of Defense Transportation System rates with commercial rates near impossible, i.e., the cost of wartime readiness. The cost to maintain a transportation system that supports our National Security Strategy and National Military Strategy impacts all factors of our military transportation system. While USTRANSCOM will continue to improve its efficiency and effectiveness, a transportation system designed to take the warfighters to the fight, to sustain the war effort, and to return our soldiers and sailors to their home when the fight is over, cannot be directly compared to a commercial enterprise. If confirmed, I will continue efforts to streamline both USTRANSCOM and the DTS.

Answer: The most serious problem facing us in the mobility business is the daily challenge of meeting the readiness needs of our theater CINCs. While we have done a superb job of meeting these needs on a daily basis over the years since Desert Shield and Desert Storm, our capability to continue meeting this challenge, at the levels we are sustaining, is very fragile. We must be ever vigilant in our struggle to keep our forces the best organized, trained, and equipped in the world. The challenges are many: maintenance of an adequate quality of life, modernization of our equipment and facilities, and controlling an escalating OPTEMPO in the face of level funding and personnel fielding. I believe we can meet these challenges, and if confirmed, I look forward to working with the members of this Committee to do just that. As far as a timeline goes, I can only say that I see this as a continuing challenge which, with your approval, I will formally pick up—with enthusiasm--on day one.

Answer: Since graduating from the Air Force Academy in 1968, I have been blessed with a host of opportunities and experiences…as well as with some of the finest commanders, bosses, teachers, mentors, role models and friends that the Services have ever produced. For the past two years I’ve commanded half of AMC’s airlift and tanker aircraft, supporting global mobility operations worldwide. Prior to that assignment, I was the Vice Commander for all of AMC during heightened operations in SWA and during our initial deployment to and buildup in Bosnia. As the Vice Director of the Joint Staff, I had direct, personal and frequent contact with the SECDEF, CJCS, all the CINCs and the Service Chiefs on many major issues, operations, and planning matters confronting all the CINCs, including CINCTRANS. Throughout these 30 years I have watched our military grow and evolve into a force that today is recognized as the best equipped, trained, and educated in the world…perhaps the finest team of military professionals the world has ever known. If confirmed, I will be honored to lead one of the most critical components of that team. I am a true believer in the Total Force Concept that leverages active, guard, and reserve component forces of all services to meet our national security challenge. The command experiences, field training and education I’ve been fortunate to have thus far have prepared me for the tasks ahead. I look forward to the opportunity to serve our country and the great men and women of the United States Transportation Command.

Answer: If confirmed, I will urgently undertake three tasks in the following order: First, I will visit the key customers of the United States Transportation Command, namely, the warfighting CINCS. I will seek out their needs and pledge my complete and total support to their critical missions. I see one of my primary jobs to be one of the guarantors of their success. Second, I will aggressively move to visit, listen to and shake the hands of those men and women around the world who perform this globally important mobility mission. I want them to know that I am dedicated to ensuring that they have the equipment, training, and quality of life necessary to sustain the most capable military in the world. Finally, I look forward to again visiting Capitol Hill to report my personal observations on the status of the command and to develop the dialogue necessary to ensure we continue the progress we’ve made in assembling and molding the finest transportation team in history.

Answer: Yes. Our nation was founded on the principal of civilian control of the military. I am honored to have the opportunity to serve in this challenging position, and I look forward to periodically appearing before this Committee to keep you personally apprised of the readiness status and mission related requirements of the United States Transportation Command

Answer: Yes. On 5 June 1968, I raised my right hand swore then to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States"; my commitment to that ideal has only grown stronger over the past 30 years. I am keenly aware of the responsibility I have to provide candid, honest information to my superiors, regardless of the pressures or politics surrounding the situation.

Answer: Yes. If confirmed, I look forward to appearing and testifying before this Committee at both annual posture hearings and on any other specific issues you may require. I view frequent and open interaction with this Committee and the Committee’s Staff as vital to the successful resolution of United States Transportation Command’s issues – now and into the future.

Answer: Yes. If confirmed, I will ensure that this Committee and other oversight Committees are provided with required and requested information in as accurate and as timely a manner as possible.