[Senate Hearing 110-946]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
S. Hrg. 110-946
NOMINATION OF ELAINE C. DUKE
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON
HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON THE
NOMINATION OF ELAINE C. DUKE TO BE UNDER SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
__________
JUNE 20, 2008
__________
Available via http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
----------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
44-119 PDF WASHINGTON : 2009
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman
CARL LEVIN, Michigan SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii TED STEVENS, Alaska
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana TOM COBURN, Oklahoma
BARACK OBAMA, Illinois PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri JOHN WARNER, Virginia
JON TESTER, Montana JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire
Michael L. Alexander, Staff Director
Kristine V. Lam, Professional Staff Member
Brandon L. Milhorn, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Jennifer L. Tarr, Minority Counsel
Trina Driessnack Tyrer, Chief Clerk
Patricia R. Hogan, Publications Clerk and GPO Detailee
Laura W. Kilbride, Hearing Clerk
C O N T E N T S
------
Opening statements:
Page
Senator Akaka................................................ 1
Prepared statements:
Senator Lieberman............................................ 13
Senator Voinovich............................................ 14
WITNESS
Friday, June 20, 2008
Elaine C. Duke to be Under Secretary for Management, U.S.
Department of Homeland Security:
Testimony.................................................... 3
Prepared statement........................................... 15
Biographical and professional information.................... 18
Letter from U.S. Office of Government Ethics................. 30
Responses to pre-hearing questions........................... 31
Responses to post-hearing questions.......................... 77
NOMINATION OF ELAINE C. DUKE
----------
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 20, 2008
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:07 a.m., in
room 342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,
presiding.
Present: Senator Akaka.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR AKAKA
Senator Akaka. This hearing will come to order. Aloha, good
morning, and welcome to all of you.
Today, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs meets to consider the nomination of Elaine Duke to be
Under Secretary for Management at the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS).
Ms. Duke is a native of Ohio and a graduate of Southern New
Hampshire University, but most importantly, she received her
M.B.A. from Chaminade University in Honolulu. So let me say
aloha pumehana to you and congratulations, Ms. Duke, on your
nomination.
Ms. Duke has over 25 years of experience in Federal
service. Most recently, she has served as Deputy Under
Secretary for Management at the Department of Homeland
Security, and prior to that as Chief Procurement Officer for
the Department. I would also like to point out that she spent a
considerable part of her career serving in Hawaii, first at
Hickam Air Force Base and subsequently at Pearl Harbor Naval
Shipyard. The depth of her experience is extraordinary and the
Nation is grateful for your service.
As you know, implementing and transforming the Department
of Homeland Security has been on the Government Accountability
Office's high-risk list since 2003. I believe that DHS
represents the most serious management challenge in the Federal
Government today. That concern, shared also by Senator
Voinovich, is one reason why we introduced ``The Effective
Homeland Security Management Act,'' known as S. 547, which
would establish a Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security for
Management with a term appointment. We have not yet succeeded
in that important goal, but we were able to strengthen your
management authority by designating your position as the Chief
Management Officer for DHS.
I want to also commend Ms. Duke and her accomplishments
over the course of her tenure as the Department's Chief
Procurement Officer. Already, you have made significant
progress in integrating procurement operations across the
Department, and equally important, you have recruited new
acquisition workforce talent through the Acquisition
Professional Career Program. I understand that the intern
program is working and some of the first acquisition interns
are attending this hearing today. I want to extend my welcome
also to them. Just having you here makes me feel happy and
great. I want to congratulate you on being selected for this
challenging program and thank you for your service to this
country. This is a program that we need to expand.
However, I remain concerned about the Department's heavy
reliance on outside contractors. As you know, the Department
does not know how many contractors it currently employs or in
what capacity. DHS still struggles to provide sufficient
project management and oversight, particularly with large
acquisitions, such as SBInet. I look forward to working closely
with you to ensure DHS improves its acquisition and builds up
its workforce, and I am glad to see that you are focused on
that issue, as well.
Ms. Duke, I appreciate your work to make sound management
practices a priority at DHS. The Department has done an
admirable job in assessing the critical skills of its workforce
and developing succession plans for the upcoming presidential
transition. This was not an easy task and continues to be a
work in progress. But the Department is to be commended for the
attention it has shown to the importance of strategic planning
and comprehensive workforce assessment.
In addition to the short-term transition planning, DHS has
a long-term workforce challenge as baby boomers retire. DHS
must attract the next generation of employees equally committed
to the Department's mission and with the needed skills.
Veterans preference, diversity, and collaboration with unions
and employee organizations must be cornerstones of the
strategy. In looking at the interns that are present here, I
would tell you, as far as diversity is concerned, that program
certainly is meeting the criteria. I am pleased that during
your staff interview, you emphasized your dedication to
diversity recruitment, and it shows. So I look forward to
hearing more about your plans today.
A key element of the Department's recruitment and retention
strategy must be improving employee morale. Past Federal Human
Capital Surveys have highlighted systemwide employee problems
at DHS that must be addressed. As Under Secretary for
Management, your duty is to be the voice for strategic human
capital management and to ensure that workforce needs are met.
I look forward to working with you in this effort.
I am also pleased that you are willing to continue serving
at DHS through the presidential transition. As the transition
draws closer, continuity of leadership is increasingly
important. Your long career of civil service will provide you
the credibility you need through the transition, and your
management experience will be valuable to keeping the
Department focused on its mission. If confirmed, I would
certainly hope that the next Administration would consider
keeping you in your position.
Again, I look forward to working closely with you, and as
they say in Hawaii, my door will be open to you, to people who
work with you, and to DHS, as well. And so I thank you very
much, and again, congratulations. What I witness here today,
for me, is such a great improvement and it looks good for the
future.
I want to thank you very much for being here, Ms. Duke. I
would like for you, for the record, to introduce your family.
TESTIMONY OF ELAINE C. DUKE,\1\ TO BE UNDER SECRETARY FOR
MANAGEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Ms. Duke. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a privilege to be
here before you as you consider my presidential nomination to
be the next Under Secretary for Management at the Department of
Homeland Security. I have with me here today my husband, Harold
Hanson, and my son, Jason. My older son, Brian, is not able to
be with us, but all three of them have been so supportive
throughout my career and I thank them this morning.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Ms. Duke appears in the Appendix on
page 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am deeply honored that President Bush has nominated me to
serve this great country and its people in this capacity. I am
grateful to Secretary Chertoff and Deputy Secretary Schneider
for all the support they have given me to date.
I would like to thank this Committee and your staff for the
thoughtful oversight of the Department of Homeland Security and
your great willingness to work with the Department so
effectively in protecting our country. If confirmed, I commit
that I will continue to work with you and your Committee, other
government departments and agencies, businesses large and
small, and the public to protect the homeland for present and
future generations.
I would also like to acknowledge and extend my appreciation
to the management staff, many of whom are with me here today,
and a special thank you to the first class of the DHS
Acquisition Professional Career Program interns here today.
They are our future, and I am very proud to serve with them.
I consider the Under Secretary for Management a critical
position in the Department of Homeland Security and am humbled
that I am being considered for it. I recognize that this
country will count on the Under Secretary for Management to
ensure continuity of mission critical functions through the
upcoming change of Administration. I believe that my proven
ability to successfully lead, manage, and perform the functions
of the Department business lines has demonstrated I have the
skill set and experience to meet the challenges of this
considerable responsibility. Should I be confirmed, I will
bring my passion for good government with me to this new
position.
Thank you very much for this opportunity to appear here
today, and I am happy to answer your questions, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Akaka. Well, thank you very much, Ms. Duke. I am
sure you know now that our Committee rules require that all
witnesses be under oath, and therefore I ask that you stand and
raise your right hand.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to
give this Committee is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you, God?
Ms. Duke. I do.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much. Let the record note
that the witness responded in the affirmative.
Again, I want to welcome you here. You have filed responses
to a biographical and financial questionnaire, answered pre-
hearing questions submitted by the Committee, and had your
financial statements reviewed by the Office of Government
Ethics. Without objection, this information will be made a part
of the hearing record, with the exception of the financial
data, which are on file and available for public inspection in
the Committee offices.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The biographical information of Ms. Duke appears in the
Appendix on page 18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I again thank you for being here and for introducing your
family, as well. I want to tell you that besides being happy to
have you here, I can see that you have a lot of strong support
with you, and certainly you know you have support from here, as
well.
I will begin with the standard questions to you. Is there
anything you are aware of in your background that might present
a conflict of interest with the duties of the office to which
you have been nominated?
Ms. Duke. No, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Akaka. Do you know of anything, personal or
otherwise, that would in any way prevent you from fully and
honorably discharging the responsibilities of the office to
which you have been nominated?
Ms. Duke. No, sir.
Senator Akaka. Do you agree without reservation to respond
to any reasonable summons to appear and testify before any duly
constituted Committee of Congress if you are confirmed?
Ms. Duke. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much for your responses.
Ms. Duke, one issue of great concern to the Oversight of
Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District
of Columbia Subcommittee that I chair is how to attract the
next generation of Federal workers. You have demonstrated that
already. I held a hearing in May on how to improve recruiting
and hiring practices. Some of the concerns expressed at that
hearing were agencies who are not taking advantage of e-
recruitment tools; agency managers are not engaged in the
recruitment process; the hiring process takes too long; there
is a lack of communication in the recruitment and hiring
process; candidates cannot just submit a resume and cover
letter to apply for a position; and agencies need to invest
more in human resource professionals. And again, I repeat this
came out in that hearing.
I would appreciate it if you could give your assessment of
these concerns and how you think DHS should meet this
challenge.
Ms. Duke. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I agree with you that human
capital is our biggest challenge in management, both filling
our existing vacancies and planning for succession in the
future, since we do have a large portion of the Federal
workforce retiring in the next 5 years. There are several
approaches we need to take to this.
One is better recruiting from the colleges, universities,
and also Department of Defense (DOD). We have looked at mid-
career military leaving. It is a great way to not only attract
people with wonderful experience--the non-commissioned officers
in the military have great leadership experience--but they also
bring to us a diverse population who are also veterans, and
that is something we are very much expanding this year,
including building a partnership with Defense and going over to
Germany where they are outprocessing the military coming out of
Afghanistan and Iraq and working on placing them right out of
DOD.
So we have started that, but one of the areas I want to
work on, if confirmed, is doing it more centralized for DHS.
Recruiting through colleges and Department of Defense is time-
intensive, and we have to make sure that as we are recruiting,
we are recruiting for the whole Department, not just pieces of
it, so we can draw and attract more efficiently the new college
graduates and separating veterans.
In terms of workforce, I believe within DHS we have a
challenge in the Human Capital Office in terms of having the
right number of people and the right skill set to do the human
capital function. We have an increase in the President's budget
for the Human Capital Office and this Committee has always been
supportive and I would ask you for your continued support in
that area.
The Human Capital Office has a huge role not only in
leading the Department in human capital, but also doing the
staffing for the 3,000 employees at headquarters, including
many of the senior executives in the Department, and that is an
area we really want to make sure we have our career senior
executives in place. As you may know, we have nearly a 20-
percent vacancy rate right now, and that is a near-term effort
we are focusing on so that we can have those employees in place
before the election in order to have a robust Senior Executive
Service (SES) to help us better withstand the transition of our
political employees.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much for that. I am glad you
mentioned about veterans and the military. With that, of
course, comes a little more maturity and experience that is
brought to the workplace. Diversity, of course, is another
thing that is needed.
Ms. Duke, you previously mentioned that, if confirmed, you
would address employee concerns, especially those identified in
the recent DHS employee survey about communications and
performance management. Can you explain in greater detail what
you understand employee concerns to be and what actions you
would take to address them?
Ms. Duke. One of the areas in performance that we improved
on was employees understanding their performance plans, and I
think in large part that has to do with moving more employees
to the system that allows them to input into their performance
appraisals and have clear standards linked to the strategic
plan; this is done through the ePerformance tool that is
online. We have about 20,000 employees now on that. So they can
go online at any time and see their performance, the input of
their supervisors and input themselves. So we have improved on
clarity and understanding.
The areas that we, I will say, have the most challenge in
is satisfaction with pay and appropriately dealing with poor
performers. Our employees think that we don't effectively deal
with poor performance in the workplace and we have to work on
better distinguishing between good performers and good
performers in rewards. The other area related to your question
is employees thinking they have a fair rating.
So what we are doing in this area is we did some looking at
why this is the case and we did some focus groups with the
leaders in DHS headquarters and found that we have some basic
challenges in supervisors knowing how to supervise the Federal
workforce. And so we are starting with, I will call it
Supervision 101 training that we will have ready in about a
month and actually making sure our supervisors know how to
appropriately deal with good and poor performers in the
workplace. Good performers--what type of awards and rewards are
available for them to use so they can utilize them effectively.
And in terms of poor performers, what actions should a
supervisor take if an employee is either performing poorly or
has conduct problems so that they actually do take those steps.
That is one of the actions we are looking at, and I think that
is going to be a good baseline.
We have changed our senior executives' performance plans to
focus more on being a supervisor as one of their performance
elements, everything from managing performance to ethics in
leadership to managing diversity, and I think that letting our
employees know, especially our most senior executives, that
really is one of their key objectives, not just meeting the
mission, is going to really set the tone for our Department.
Senator Akaka. I authored a provision in the Post-Katrina
Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 establishing a Homeland
Security Rotation Program for mid-level employees. I know the
Department issued a directive on the program last year. I
wonder if you are aware of it and if you could comment on how
it is working.
Ms. Duke. It is working, but in pockets right now, and it
is something that we really should use as a more systemic tool
for unifying the Department. Some of the areas it is working in
is our formal programs. Our acquisition interns here today
rotate through three components to complete their program. They
spent a year in each of three components. Our fellows and our
Executive Leadership Development Program all have rotational
assignments.
But those are pockets of programs and not institutional.
The way we are working on institutionalizing it is: The
President issued an Executive Order last fall on the National
Security Professional Program and we have identified all of our
employees that are National Security Professionals at the mid-
grades and upper grades. We are currently developing policies
stating that to be selected in a senior executive position that
is a national security position, which is virtually all of our
senior executive positions, those employees would have to have
either rotational experience or experience in a joint program.
And I think that way, it is going to be not just these
specialized programs that you are selected with, but really
making the joint and/or the multiple agency experience a
condition to be able to effectively lead the Department.
Where we are on that right now is we have identified the
employees and the target positions. We have identified the
initial training that these employees should have on the
national security framework. And now the next step is to
identify the types of rotational positions we should have, not
only within the Department, but throughout the Federal
Government.
Senator Akaka. Diversity of the workforce is an important
concern of mine, as I know it is with you. At the Committee's
business meeting next week, I hope we will report out the
Senior Executive Service Diversity Act, which I introduced to
help ensure that the senior levels of the Federal Government
reflect the Nation. And also, I am glad to hear what you said
about maybe some of the revisions that may be done in the SES
level, as well, for better management.
Could you please elaborate on your efforts and plans to
increase diversity at the Department?
Ms. Duke. Our plans to increase diversity are under two
umbrellas. One is to have a career path growth within the
Department that is more comprehensive. When you look at our
diversity numbers, we have much better diversity at the pay
grades below 13. We have a little less diversity at the 14 and
15 levels. And then we are most under-represented in several
areas at the Senior Executive Service level. So what we have to
do is find out how can we grow those diverse candidates that
are in the 13 and below and make them positioned so they can be
very competitive for the 14s, 15s, and Senior Executive
Service.
So that is one area we are doing. What we are doing in that
are some of the development programs I already talked about. We
are going to, by the end of this fiscal year, have an
information session open to all DHS employees. So if they are
in a career field that doesn't have much growth, we are going
to talk to them about the career fields in DHS that have
growth, more senior positions, have opportunities so that they
can look at maybe--it may require them to change career fields,
like some of our TSA Officers have changed to Border Patrol
Agents. But it allows them to know what opportunities are in
the Department where there is more growth and higher grade
levels. So those are some of the initiatives we are doing to
growth within.
Another thing we have done recently is we have added an
Equal Employment Opportunity representative to our ERC, which
is our Executive Resources Committee that selects all our
senior executives, to make sure that we have a concern for
diversity just day to day. It is not just an initiative.
The second area we want to work on is casting the net
wider, if you will. We have made a concerted effort this year
to really look at where we are recruiting, to go to areas where
we can get more diverse candidates. We are advertising in
newspapers and periodicals that have a larger minority
population, going to historically black universities and other
minority institutions so we can cast the net wider so that we
can bring in a more diverse pool of applicants. I think that is
the two cures to it, recruiting more broadly and then also
making sure that we have opportunities for our diverse younger
population to grow within the Department.
Senator Akaka. In a hearing I held last November, I learned
that Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers receive as
little as 2 weeks of on-the-job training following their
graduation from the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. I
understand that CBP officers now are hired exclusively through
the Federal Career Intern Program, which is designed to bring
in entry-level employees in fields where a long period of
training and development are needed. Agencies are responsible
for providing at least 2 years of formal training under the
program. How do you justify using the Career Intern Program to
hire these employees?
Ms. Duke. That is an issue that was just brought to my
attention earlier this week. The way Border Patrol is hiring
its Border Patrol agents right now is they usually start at the
5 or 7 level, and then their journeyman level is an 11. So they
are hired as 5, 7, 9, 11, which with successful performance
they would graduate at the 11 level.
We are now hiring them with an exam that has been
accredited. The one piece I will work on for you and this
Committee is making sure that while they are hired through the
intern program and are in a development program pay grade-wise,
that they actually are getting the aspects of an internship,
which means on-the-job and formal training so that it really is
an intern program, and I commit to you to continue looking at
that and seeing if that authority is being appropriately used.
I will say, though, that right now, with the huge hiring
effort in Border Patrol, we are now making initial job offers
to all applicants that do pass the exam. Now, again, that is a
conditional job offer. They still have to go through security
and other checks. So we are capturing the veteran and the
diverse population. But we do have to make sure that the intern
piece of the program is built in.
Senator Akaka. I have been looking into ways to speed up
the Federal hiring process and during our recent hearing I was
really amazed at what is in the process now and why it takes so
long to hire anyone. However, it appears that DHS may hold a
record. It takes 6 to 8 months to hire Border Patrol agents and
CBP officers. Why does it take so long and what do you plan to
do to speed up the process?
Ms. Duke. This is one of our biggest challenges, I agree
with you, Mr. Chairman. Two pieces of the hiring process. One
is the HR, or bringing the person through the selection
process. The second is the security process. What we are doing
to try to streamline the hiring process is to take advantage of
all the flexibilities we have. We have direct hire under a few
of the critical career fields, not as many as we would like,
but where we do have it, we have to make sure we are taking
advantage of it, in the intelligence area, acquisition, and
information security specialists.
One of the things we suffer from is, I think, because we
are a new department, hiring should be a repeatable process. It
should be very regular. We don't have that yet, and that is
something we are developing. We just implemented, about 2 weeks
ago, a process where we look at every step of the human
resources piece of the process and target days to get people
through the different stages of the process, and that is, I
think, going to be key. It is a very elementary step, but it is
going to be important to measure our human resources people
performance against each step of the HR process.
The second area where we have had challenges is getting
security clearances. Every one of our employees have to go
through clearance and suitability. In the Federal Government,
there is reciprocity of clearances, so if somebody already has
a clearance, we do accept it. We have not to date had any
reciprocity of suitability, so even if someone is moving from,
say, an employee to a contractor or a contractor to employee
within DHS, they have to go through the suitability process
again. That is something that we are looking at and trying
first to build reciprocity within the Department.
And then we are also on a Federal working group to look at
how can we have reciprocity of suitability at least in some of
the major career fields. There might be certain ones, like
intelligence officers, where you might want to specifically
look at them again. But we do have support from Charlie Allen,
who is our Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis. So I
think that the reciprocity of security clearances and
suitability is going to really shorten that process, too.
Senator Akaka. Ms. Duke, the Government Accountability
Office has often commented on DHS's over-reliance on
contractors. Secretary Chertoff testified earlier this year
that the Department plans to convert several contractor-held
positions to career over the next fiscal year. Can you tell us
which positions are an especially high priority for in-sourcing
and how many you anticipate converting?
Ms. Duke. The biggest area we are converting--this is more
of a problem for headquarters, the non-Gang of Seven. Within
TSA, CBP, FEMA, those components that came into DHS, it is not
as much of an issue. I think where the most risk is some of the
headquarters departments, where we grew so quickly, there
wasn't an anticipation in our budget that we would be 3,000
people and have the mission, and so that is the biggest
challenge.
The area where we are converting most of the positions this
year is the National Protection and Programs Directorate
(NPPD). There are two areas we are looking at building. One is
where we don't have the corporate knowledge or the subject
matter expertise within the Department to really drive the
mission forward. Some of the critical areas are critical
infrastructure, cyber security. And then the second area is
where we don't have enough Federal employees to appropriately
manage the contracts. I would put both of those into the
category that this Committee called inherently governmental
services, and the NPPD has nearly 300 positions that they are
currently filling under Federal employees rather than
contractors.
Some other areas we are looking at is in Intelligence and
Analysis (I&A). We are looking at lessening our reliance on
intelligence officers. That is a really hard area to recruit,
but we are redoubling our efforts, and I am meeting weekly with
Charlie Allen, the Under Secretary, to try to improve our
efforts there. He has a hard competition because he is
competing against CIA and FBI and some very great agencies.
The other area we are working on is some areas in
management. We have certain areas in security where we have our
counterintelligence and other areas, and some of the areas in
information technology where we want to have a little more
robust workforce so that we make sure that we do have the core
competencies within our Federal employees.
So altogether, there are about 400 positions in
headquarters that we are targeting for this year.
Senator Akaka. Ms. Duke, as I said in my opening statement,
one project underway at DHS continues to cause concern and that
is the SBInet. While Congress has been informed that DHS did
not pay anything over the $20 million cap on Project 28 (P-28),
I remain concerned about the delivery delays and software
problems. We have been told that work may begin soon on
securing the Northern border under the same SBInet contract
with Boeing.
Given the numerous concerns over the SBInet contract and
the significant differences between the Northern and Southern
border, could you see a scenario in which you might want to
issue a separate request for proposals for the Northern border?
Ms. Duke. I think there are many pieces of securing the
border that we will not do under the Boeing contract. We are
not doing the fence on the Southern border. Unmanned Aerial
Vehicles (UAVs) are going to be a large part in the current
plan of securing the Northern border because of the threat and
the terrain. Those are not going to be bought under the SBInet
contract with Boeing. So there are many areas, both on the
Southern and Northern border, that are not appropriate for the
Boeing contract.
Each time we have a new task, the program office is
responsible for doing a cost-benefit analysis and looking at
whether that specific task should be bought under the Boeing
contract or not, so that is a requirement we have imposed and
the program office is required to do and we are overseeing.
In terms specifically of the P-28, the main issue on P-28
was the Common Operating Picture (COP), the software. The
challenges under that were driven by--I think we underestimated
the complexity of integrating commercial elements. So going in,
both the government and Boeing thought that we were buying
already commercially proven technology, all we are going to do
is integrate it, and that would be easy, and that is what the
P-28 demonstration project did prove to be incorrect. It did
show us that the integration piece is difficult and it is
important.
How we are dealing with that is we are working on building
the pieces demonstrated in P-28 into what we call the 0.5
version of the Common Operating Picture. That will be tested
before it is deployed, and then the eventual delivery of a
Common Operating Picture will be the 1.0, the fully operational
version, meeting CBP's full operational requirements.
One of the things we are doing as part of this process is
we have Lincoln Laboratories, an independent federally funded
research and development center, looking at the alternatives to
our Common Operating Picture. So Lincoln Labs--and it is
supposed to be done, I believe in about a month--is looking at
not only the COP that we are developing to 0.5, but also
looking at other alternatives of commercially available
software or some being used proprietary in DOD and making sure
that before we deploy to the Northern border, or more on the
Southern border, for that matter, that we have the right
software choice.
So I do share your concerns, Mr. Chairman, on slowing down,
but I also think it is important to get the COP right. That is
the heart. That is how the Border Patrol is going to command
and control incidents and that is a key piece of the system and
we have to get it right, and I believe that until we have
manageable risk on technology, we might have to, as we have
done this fiscal year, just deal with a little bit of schedule
slippage.
Senator Akaka. Ms. Duke, when Deputy Secretary Paul
Schneider was the Under Secretary for Management, he also held
the role of Chief Acquisition Officer. If confirmed, could you
explain how you see acquisition authorities and
responsibilities being managed?
Ms. Duke. Yes. If confirmed, I would be the Department's
Chief Acquisition Officer. One of the biggest initiatives I
started when I was the Chief Procurement Officer and would
really drive as the Chief Acquisition Officer is to make sure
that we are managing acquisition as a system. When the
Department was set up, the Chief Procurement Officer had
authority over procurement, which is really just the business
piece. If you flow-chart out the acquisition process, awarding
the contract is at the tail end of a process that could be
years, and that is what the Under Secretary of Management
through the Chief Procurement Officer had authority for.
What we have done is we have grown that functional
authority to the entire acquisition process, and what I mean by
that is not just the business deal, the contract piece, but
program management, test and evaluation, systems engineering,
all the elements that really make a good program. This
Committee has recognized that one of our major problems in
acquisition is good requirements. We need those good
requirements up front out of the Program Office. You can't
build those in at the end of the process in a contract.
What I would do as the Chief Acquisition Officer, if
confirmed, is continue to build that authority. We have gone
out and asked each component to have a single point of contact
that would be the accountable person for acquisition in each of
the components that has major programs. So I think that would
take the Chief Acquisition Officer of the Department and give
that person accountable contacts within each of the major
components to make the focus.
The other big area that I think is going to drive
acquisition improvements is our focus on program managers,
making sure that they are certified and making sure that they
have managed the program cost schedule and performance as their
performance evaluation criteria.
Senator Akaka. When GAO reported to Congress on its high-
risk list last year, it said this about DHS, ``DHS has not
linked its goals to resource requirements in its strategic plan
and does not involve all stakeholders in its strategic planning
process. Moreover, DHS lacks not only a comprehensive strategy
with overall goals and a time line, but also a dedicated
management integration team to support its management
integration efforts.''
Could you comment on what steps the Department has taken to
address these issues raised by GAO and what more needs to be
done to correct this problem?
Ms. Duke. Well, we have developed corrective action plans
for each of the areas in the GAO report, and each of those
corrective action plans is focused on the area, the flood
program, those type of things, and those corrective action
plans do have milestones and deliverables required to drive the
program off the high-risk list.
The other thing we are doing in terms of the strategic plan
is the Department has decided--the strategic plan is managed by
Assistant Secretary Stew Baker. We have met with Deputy
Secretary Schneider and we are going to put the performance
objectives in the strategic plan as recommended by GAO. You may
know that we did have a strategic plan that we sent to OMB and
it was rejected because it did not have the goals, just like
GAO said. So we are in the process of putting the goals in the
strategic plan. We are meeting with all the stakeholders. We
have three of the five goals done, and we would expect to have
that plan very soon. It will definitely be this summer.
Senator Akaka. Well, I really thank you for your responses.
There are no further questions at this time, Ms. Duke, but
there may be additional questions for the record which we will
submit to you in writing. The hearing record will remain open
until the close of business today for Members of this Committee
to submit additional statements or questions. Your full
statement will also be included in the record.
I know you are anxious for your nomination to move forward.
It is my hope that the Committee will vote on it in the near
future and that your nomination will be considered
expeditiously in the full Senate. I want to tell you that I
will do all I can to bring that about as soon as we can. I look
upon your nomination as one that we need.
I thank you so much for your responses. Your responses show
your experience and that you understand the problems that we
need to work on and that we need to work on those problems
together and as quickly as we can, because DHS, as you know, is
a huge Department. It has the critical mission of protecting
the security of our country, so we need to work on it as
quickly as possible.
Again, I want to thank you. It is good to meet your family
and your interns here, as well as others who are supporting you
in your position. So thank you again.
Ms. Duke. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Akaka. Aloha and best wishes. This hearing is
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 10:53 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR LIEBERMAN
I am pleased to support Elaine Duke's nomination as Under Secretary
for Management at the Department of Homeland Security and I also want
to take this opportunity to commend her for her more than quarter of a
century in public service.
Thomas Jefferson once said that: ``A nation that rests on the will
of the people must also depend on individuals to support its
institutions in whatever ways are appropriate if it is to flourish.
Persons qualified for public office should feel some obligation to make
that contribution.''
Ms. Duke has chosen to make that contribution in one of the most
underappreciated but, in the end, vitally important areas of government
service--contracting and procurement--making sure the taxpayers are
getting their money's worth for each from every dollar of government
spending.
Until joining DHS, Ms. Duke's career spanned the breadth of
government and the width of our nation--from Charleston, S.C., to
Hawaii to Washington with stints in the Air Force, the Navy, the
Railroad Administration and the Smithsonian Institute.
At DHS, Ms. Duke has been part of the team charged with the
daunting mission of merging 22 separate federal agencies with different
missions, procedures and cultures into one effective agency dedicated
to preparation and response to disasters whether natural or at the
hands of our terrorist enemies.
Of course there have been problems.
Some of the Department's largest acquisition programs--Deepwater,
SBInet, and radiation detection portal monitors--have also been the
most troubled and need better leadership.
Also, the Department's heavy reliance on contractors to perform
basic services raises serious questions about whether DHS is building
sufficient internal capacity and institutional knowledge. DHS still has
insufficient capacity to develop requirements and evaluate the
technical feasibility of contractors' proposals.
In addition, the remainder of this year the Department must take
great care to ensure that it is prepared for the transition to a new
Administration--the first time DHS will have been faced with this
challenge. Historically, terrorists have viewed governmental
transitions as a time of vulnerability, and I know Ms. Duke and other
leaders in the Department are working hard to make sure that a smooth
transition occurs.
I look forward to working with Ms. Duke on these and other issues
going forward.
Ms. Duke herself spoke of the enormity of the task DHS faces in an
interview where she said: ``The geographic footprint [of DHS] is
worldwide. We have about 208,000 employees, and the budget for Fiscal
Year 2007 was $42.8 billion. The organizational structure is made up of
a headquarters with both the traditional headquarters activities and
four distinct directorates with operational focus. That's the National
Preparedness Directorate, Science and Technology, the Under Secretary
of Management, and FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency]. We also
have six operational components: the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA), Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Secret
Service, U.S. Customs and Immigration Service, Immigrations and Customs
Enforcement, and the United States Coast Guard.''
She went on to say: ``I think that the focus is on how you bring
people together, how you stay focused on a solution, how you cut
through obstacles and know when enough talking is enough and when it's
time to make a decision.''
Our Nation is lucky to have women and men of Ms. Duke's dedication
who are ready to answer Jefferson's centuries old call to duty and use
her talents to make her special contribution.
__________
PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR VOINOVICH
Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Collins, I commend you both for
convening today's hearing to consider the nomination of Elaine Duke to
be the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Under Secretary for
Management.
A strong Under Secretary for Management at DHS is imperative
because the Homeland Security Act of 2002 combined 22 agencies and
180,000 employees into a new entity. This effort amounted to the
federal government's largest restructuring since the creation of the
Department of Defense in 1947. In 2003, the Government Accountability
Office (GAO) noted issues with this restructuring, and while progress
has been made, implementing and transforming DHS remains on GAO's 2007
high-risk list of programs susceptible to waste, fraud, abuse, and
mismanagement.
As the former Chairman and now Ranking Member of this Committee's
Oversight of Government Management Subcommittee, I take GAO's concerns
seriously and am committed to ensuring that the Department of Homeland
Security has the proper management structure. That is why last year I
included language in the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11
Commission Act of 2007 that clarifies that the Under Secretary for
Management is the Chief Management Officer and principal advisor to the
Secretary on the management of DHS and has responsibility for DHS's
strategic management and annual performance planning, the
identification and tracking of performance measures, and the
integration and transformation process in support of homeland security
operations and programs. The Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11
Commission Act of 2007 also sets qualification standards for the Under
Secretary of Management, requiring that the nominee have extensive
management experience, leadership skills, a demonstrated ability to
manage and a proven record.
I believe Elaine Duke has these qualifications, and I am pleased to
support her nomination as Under Secretary for Management of DHS. Ms.
Duke, who grew up in my home state of Ohio, has been with DHS since its
creation in 2002 and has served in various leadership roles including
as the Department's Chief Procurement Officer and Deputy Under
Secretary for Management. I believe this prior service has equipped her
with the skill set necessary to serve as DHS's Under Secretary for
Management.
As we consider this nomination for DHS's first Under Secretary for
Management, I think it is an opportune time to raise two ways that I
think we can continue to improve DHS's management structure.
First, I remain convinced that the Under Secretary for Management
should serve a fixed five year term. Such a term would provide
management continuity at DHS during times of leadership transition. The
need for such continuity is clearly apparent today because we are only
six months away from the largest leadership transition DHS has ever
faced, when a new President will appoint entirely new leadership. As
that new leadership is vetted and confirmed, I think it is of the
utmost importance that management with institutional knowledge remains
in place at DHS to oversee the Department's expenditure of funds,
procurement activities and human resources.
Second, I remain concerned about the management of DHS's
procurement programs. In 2005, the DHS's Office of Inspector General
(OIG) noted vulnerabilities with DHS's procurement management. The OIG
pointed out that DHS has a Chief Procurement Officer as well as seven
procurement offices that were transferred to DHS with their legacy
agencies. I question whether maintaining multiple procurement offices
in a Department that purchases billions of dollars worth of goods and
services each year is the best and wisest way to manage our resources
and oversee procurement activities.
Mr. Chairman, in announcing GAO's 2007 high-risk list, Comptroller
General Walker stated an ``array of management and programmatic
challenges continues to limit DHS's ability to carry out its roles
under the National Homeland Security Strategy in an effective risk-
based way.'' I believe Elaine Duke's nomination is an important step
towards addressing the management and programmatic challenges DHS
continues to face, and I am proud to support her nomination today.
Thank you for calling today's hearing.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]