Open Hearing: Nomination of Susan S. Gibson to be Inspector General (IG), National Reconnaissance Office (NRO)

[Senate Hearing 114-597] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office] S. Hrg. 114-597 NOMINATION OF SUSAN GIBSON TO BE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE ======================================================================= HEARING BEFORE THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION __________ TUESDAY, JUNE 7, 2016 __________ Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Intelligence [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov __________ U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 22-967 PDF WASHINGTON : 2017 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office, http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free). E-mail, gpo@custhelp.com. SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE [Established by S. Res. 400, 94th Cong., 2d Sess.] RICHARD BURR, North Carolina, Chairman DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California, Vice Chairman JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho RON WYDEN, Oregon DANIEL COATS, Indiana BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland MARCO RUBIO, Florida MARK WARNER, Virginia SUSAN COLLINS, Maine MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico ROY BLUNT, Missouri ANGUS KING, Maine JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii TOM COTTON, Arkansas MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky, Ex Officio HARRY REID, Nevada, Ex Officio JOHN McCAIN, Arizona, Ex Officio JACK REED, Rhode Island, Ex Officio ---------- Chris Joyner, Staff Director Michael Casey, Minority Staff Director Desiree Thompson Sayle, Chief Clerk CONTENTS ---------- JUNE 7, 2016 OPENING STATEMENTS Burr, Hon. Richard, Chairman, a U.S. Senator from North Carolina. 1 Feinstein, Hon. Dianne, Vice Chairman, a U.S. Senator from California..................................................... 2 WITNESS Gibson, Susan, Nominated to be Inspector General of the National Reconnaissance Agency.......................................... 3 Prepared statement........................................... 6 SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL Letter dated June 3, 2016, from Benjamin A. Powell to Senator Richard Burr and Senator Dianne Feinstein...................... 26 Letter dated June 6, 2016, from Stephanie Barna to Senator Richard Burr and Senator Dianne Feinstein...................... 28 Letter dated June 4, 2016, from John C. Inglis to Senator Richard Burr and Senator Dianne Feinstein.............................. 30 Letter dated June 3, 2016, from Robert S. Litt to Senator Richard Burr and Senator Dianne Feinstein.............................. 32 Questionnaire for Completion by Presidential Nominees............ 34 Additional Prehearing Questions.................................. 49 Letter dated April 25, 2016, from the Office of Government Ethics to Senator Richard Burr........................................ 67 NOMINATION OF SUSAN GIBSON TO BE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE ---------- TUESDAY, JUNE 7, 2016 U.S. Senate, Select Committee on Intelligence, Washington, DC. The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:31 p.m. in Room SH-216, Hart Senate Office Building, Hon. Richard Burr (Chairman of the Committee) presiding. Committee Members Present: Senators Burr, Feinstein, Risch, Rubio, Collins, Blunt, Cotton, Wyden, Heinrich, King, and Hirono. OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BURR, CHAIRMAN, A U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH CAROLINA Chairman Burr. I'd like to call the hearing to order. Ms. Gibson, congratulations on your nomination to be the first advised and consent Inspector General for the National Reconnaissance Office. You have an impressive background both within the intelligence community and the Department of Defense, which I believe will serve you well in your new assignment. I'd also like to welcome your husband Tim, who is in the audience today, and I thank him both for his support for you and his distinguished service to our country. In many cases, inspector generals are the eyes and ears of their respective agencies' leadership, and they can be for Congress as well. Through critical oversight of the Executive Branch operations, they can provide useful assessments of performance and identify areas for improvement. We need efficiency of effort across government now more than ever. I feel strongly that effective and independent inspector generals can help us achieve that goal. The NRO's classified budget is significant, and the NRO Inspector General plays a vital oversight role in detecting and hopefully deterring any fraud, waste, or abuse within the NRO. As we conduct our own oversight of the NRO, we may look to your office for its opinions on the programs that are functioning well or may need improvement. As the NRO's Inspector General, much of your work will of necessity be classified. This means that there will most often not be public airings of your assessments. As a result, Congress and the American people must have full confidence that your findings are objective, independent, and entirely supported by the facts. Ms. Gibson, I've reviewed the material provided by you prior to this confirmation hearing and have spoken with you personally. I'm confident that you're a person of high integrity and well qualified for this job. Thank you again for being here today, for your years of service to our country, and I look forward to your testimony. I now recognize the Vice Chairman. OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, VICE CHAIRMAN, A U.S. SENATOR FROM CALIFORNIA Vice Chairman Feinstein. Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to congratulate our prospective Inspector General. I'd like to welcome her family, and maybe next time we'll get a smaller room. But we should all feel very comfortable; plenty of space. In 2013 this Committee included in the Intelligence Authorization Act a requirement for Senate confirmation of the inspectors general for the National Reconnaissance Office and the National Security Agency. So, Ms. Gibson, you're the first nominee to be considered by the Senate for the NRO position. This month the NSA Inspector General will be stepping down, and the CIA has been without a Senate-confirmed inspector general since January of 2015. Given the importance of IGs, I believe these gaps in service are unacceptable. Last June I wrote to the President to urge him to nominate an IG for the CIA. Today I renew this request and ask him to ensure NSA does not languish without a Senate-confirmed IG. Ms. Gibson, you and I recently had the opportunity to meet and discuss your nomination, and I want you to know that I personally appreciated our frank discussion, which demonstrated your understanding of the role of the IG and the need to be principled, objective, and effective in your oversight of virtually every aspect of the NRO. If confirmed, it will be your job to ensure that the NRO remains free of waste, fraud, and mismanagement, while avoiding politicization of the office. You will also have to support efforts to drive the organization toward more efficient and effective operations. I believe that you have the background to carry out this mission. It's also important that you recognize, which I believe you do, your responsibility to keep this committee fully and currently informed about the concerns you may identify at the NRO. I don't want to sugarcoat it, but this is really a big job. It's a big job in part due to NRO's size and the complexity of its mission. You're going to be required to dig deep into some very technical and complicated programs, including some of the most classified and also expensive programs. But it's also a big job because it comes with an extra responsibility of conducting oversight of an organization in which most activities are conducted in secret. The duty to the American public cannot be overstated here. This committee is charged with ensuring the intelligence community operates in a manner that's legal, efficient, and abides by the values of the American people. This requires effective and independent inspectors general to support us in this task. So it's our expectation that, if confirmed, you will make full use of the authorities provided to you as an inspector general and keep this committee clearly advised. So I will ask in my question time how you intend to do our oversight, so that the committee can understand your vision for this office. So congratulations on the nomination and thank you for being here. I look forward to our discussion. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Burr. Thank you, Vice Chairman. Ms. Gibson, I'm going to ask you to stand and raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear to give this committee the truth, the full truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Ms. Gibson. I do. TESTIMONY OF SUSAN GIBSON, NOMINATED TO BE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE Chairman Burr. Please be seated. I'll ask you to answer the five standard questions the committee poses to each nominee who appears before us. They just require a simple yes or no answer for the record. One, do you agree to appear before the committee here and in other venues when invited? Ms. Gibson. Yes, sir. Chairman Burr. Two, if confirmed do you agree to send officials from your office to appear before the committee and designated staff when invited? Ms. Gibson. Yes. Chairman Burr. Three, do you agree to provide documents and any other materials requested by the committee in order to carry out its oversight and legislative responsibilities? Ms. Gibson. Yes. Chairman Burr. Four, will you both ensure that your office and your staff provide such materials to the committee when we request it? Ms. Gibson. Yes. Chairman Burr. And five, do you agree to inform and fully brief to the fullest extent possible all members of this committee of intelligence activities and covert action, rather than only the Chair and the Vice Chair? Ms. Gibson. Yes, sir. Chairman Burr. Thank you very much, Ms. Gibson. We'll now proceed to your opening statement, after which I'll recognize members by seniority for five minutes each of questions. The floor is yours. Ms. Gibson. Thank you very much, Chairman. Good afternoon, Chairman Burr, Vice Chairman Feinstein, and distinguished members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today as you consider my nomination to be the Inspector General for the National Reconnaissance Office. I also appreciate the opportunity I've had to meet with several of you and to hear your concerns for the NRO and for the intelligence community at large. I'm deeply honored that the President nominated me for this position and I'm grateful for the support of both Director Clapper and Director Sapp. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you, with Director Sapp, and with the fine women and men of the NRO and the NRO Inspector General's Office to further the NRO's mission. Before going any further, I would like to recognize my husband Tim, who joins me here today. A week from today is our 36th wedding anniversary. Tim and I met in high school and both had full Army careers. We supported each other all along the way. It was very much a team. We had a great deal of fun and we've raised two amazing daughters, Katie and Joanna, who are both here in spirit, but have very busy, full, and interesting lives and couldn't make it, unfortunately. I'd also like to acknowledge publicly the support I've received from my parents, but particularly from my mother, Claudette Green. I'm the first person in my family, which includes my brother, my sister, and nearly 20 cousins, to graduate from college. I couldn't have accomplished this without the love and support of my remarkable mother, who's now 80. But, like my daughters, she is still busy and leading a very full life and is unable to join us today. I would like to thank my friends, my co-workers, many of whom are here today--thank you--and my many mentors. Life is a team sport and so is public service. As one of my mentors, Stephanie O'Sullivan, says: ``There's no end to what we can accomplish if we don't care who gets the credit.'' I couldn't agree more, and I'm thankful for the wonderful team that helped me along the way. To briefly address my qualifications for this position, my 22 years in the Army JAG Corps encompassed a broad legal practice, to include criminal law and investigations, government contracting and fiscal law, international agreements, domestic and international crisis response, human intelligence operations, and privacy and civil liberties. My time in the Army also impressed on me the importance of building and nurturing strong teams and effective teams. I joined the intelligence community while I was still wearing my Army colonel's uniform, first at the Defense Intelligence Agency and then as part of DNI Negroponte's original legal team. I later retired from the Army and joined the civilian ranks at ODNI. I've supported all four DNIs and have touched on virtually every aspect of the mission. I helped stand up the office, assisted with drafting multiple intelligence community policies, helped rewrite Executive Order 12333, and regularly provided advice and counsel as we worked through many issues affecting the intelligence community. As a result of these experiences, I'm well grounded in intelligence law and policy and in many other areas of law relevant to the mission of the NRO and its Inspector General, to include fiscal law, whistleblower protections, ethics, procurement law, and procurement integrity. Most important, during my years in government I've learned and re-learned the importance of conducting a careful and unbiased analysis of the facts and the law, acting with integrity and honesty and proceeding with openness and inclusion. These are the foundations of good government and they are also foundational to conducting effective oversight. My experience at ODNI has made me acutely aware of the essential role of the NRO in the national security of this country. I'm also aware of the growing risks to NRO's mission. I recognize that if I'm confirmed this committee will have high expectations for my performance and for the performance of the NRO IG's office. I share those same expectations. If confirmed, I pledge to continue the office's legacy of excellence, to use my many years of experience to reduce risks and to improve the NRO's efficiency and effectiveness. Finally, I also recognize and indeed embrace Congress' oversight of the NRO. Congressional oversight is fundamental to the checks and balances established in our Constitution and the only way that the intelligence community can effectively operate in our open and democratic society. If confirmed, I will fully support the NRO IG's notification and reporting responsibilities and keep the NRO's oversight committees fully and currently informed. I'm under no illusion that fulfilling the responsibilities of this new position will be easy. If confirmed, I pledge to do my very best as I continue to serve my Nation. Thank you again for your consideration of my nomination and I look forward to taking your questions. [The prepared statement of Ms. Gibson follows:] [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Chairman Burr. Ms. Gibson, thank you. I thank your husband, your daughters, and, yes, I even thank your mother for the fact that she made sure you made it through the gauntlet of education and bring your expertise to a critical role at the NRO. With that, I'll recognize myself and then the Vice Chairman and then by seniority the members. I've met with the NRO leadership many times and stressed the need for the organization to streamline their processes to more rapidly and affordably field capabilities with the latest technologies. As is typically the case, it's difficult to have a large organization make fundamental changes in acquisition practices without sustained and constant oversight. Two questions: Can you describe how the IG currently reviews the acquisition of satellite systems at NRO? And how often are investigators reviewing program management to ensure resources are efficiently and effectively managed? Ms. Gibson. Chairman, as we discussed briefly before this hearing, I think we both share the same concerns about acquisition and the need to streamline acquisition to stay ahead of the curve in technology and keep our edge in this world, where technology is driving things more and more. It is something that I have given a great deal of thought to, as to how to go about doing this at the NRO. I think it is the same in many other areas. Effective oversight would include the audits, the inspections, being present, being there, being receptive to the sorts of complaints and concerns that people bring to you, and by being a partner oftentimes in the mission and taking problems and taking recommendations to the leadership often. I quite frankly am not familiar yet with how often they're doing these inspections and audits. NRO has passed its audits for the last several years, which is encouraging and something I hope to continue and encourage as the IG. But it's something that I think would be clearly a priority and a focus if I was confirmed to be the IG at the NRO. Chairman Burr. Good. Would your office be ready and willing to support our efforts to identify organizational or procedural changes required to help the NRO become more agile and cost-competitive in their acquisition process? Ms. Gibson. Certainly, sir. Chairman Burr. Great. With that, I'll turn to the Vice Chairman. Vice Chairman Feinstein. Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Gibson, a key purpose of this hearing is to ensure that the nominee understands the independent role of the IG in a secret organization like the NRO, and that Congress depends on an independent, impartial IG to pursue allegations of malfeasance such as the NRO has faced in the past. The now-retired previous NRO IG, Lanie D'Alessandro, has been quoted in the press as saying, and I quote: ``If you're going to do this job, well, you risk your future job aspirations. It's best you take the job as a swan song before you retire.'' End quote. From your knowledge, do you agree with this statement? And what impediments to your independence do you foresee, and how would you ensure your complete independence, upon which this committee relies? Ms. Gibson. Vice Chairman Feinstein, it's hard to say whether I agree with that statement, not having been in the position. I think I'm more comfortable answering for you how I would keep my independence and sort of my own personal views on independence. For better or worse, I am at that part of my career where this may well be my swan song, so I can start there. However, I don't think that's necessary. I've been an attorney, a deputy general counsel, for many years. I've given a lot of advice to people, advice that they didn't necessarily want to hear. My experience has been if you're open, if you're honest, if you're unbiased, and if you're giving advice and overseeing things in the correct spirit, to improve things, to find efficiencies, not to grind axes, that people are more than willing to listen to you, even when they find it difficult. They may grumble at you. They may not be happy to see you come into their office as the ethics official for an agency. I've had this happen several times. People aren't necessarily happy to see you come through the door. But if you give them a day or two, they'll almost always thank you for your honest advice. And that's been my experience, and I think much of it has to do with your own personal integrity and how you approach the position. I think the structures of the NRO's IG office are set up well for that independence. I think the fact that you have a potential appointed Inspector General before you today adds to that independence, and I believe that that is a lot of the reason that you set up this position that way. I think it will add to that independence and the ability to be independent. It's something that I will guard and grow, I hope, for the office. Vice Chairman Feinstein. Thank you. In your pre-hearing questions you noted that the current staffing allocation for the office--and I quote--``may limit its ability to recruit and retain personnel with the skills necessary to fully perform its mission.'' Could you expand on that comment and describe how the current NRO staffing allocations are limiting personnel recruiting and retention in the IG's office? Ms. Gibson. Yes, ma'am. As you know, the NRO has instituted a new system of cadre employees. I was surprised to find out how few of the personnel in the NRO IG's office are cadre, as opposed to detailees from other agencies. My answer said it may be an impediment. I don't have yet enough information to know for sure, but I think it's one of those things that as the NRO sort of matures this personnel process, the IG's office itself needs to take a good hard look at that and figure out what we need for cadre, what is appropriate to have on maybe a rotational basis or as detailees. I also think that the NRO across the board and the NRO's IG office to perform effective oversight needs some skill sets that are sometimes hard to come by. It's very high technology fields. Auditors are also sometimes in short supply. So the sorts of incentives you need, the sorts of professional development you need to ensure that people's skills stay current and sharp and to ensure that they have the skills needed to oversee these highly technical programs, are something that are going to require constant nurturing if I'm confirmed as the IG. Vice Chairman Feinstein. Let me just quickly point out that I think you have raised the Achilles' heel of these agencies, and that's rotating people in and rotating them out, because when they go out they go back to certain--a certain agency in the intelligence community, and that may limit their ability to really be fully invested in openness and honesty no matter what the cost. So I appreciate your knowledge of that and will be very interested to see what you will do and how you handle this issue. Ms. Gibson. Thank you, ma'am. Chairman Burr. Senator Collins. Senator Collins. First of all, Ms. Gibson, I want to congratulate you on your nomination and your willingness to accept this important responsibility. I would like to hear your views on how you would propose to deal with, and indeed welcome, the input of whistleblowers within the agency? Recently there have been press reports that suggest that whistleblowers in the U.S. Central Command have brought forth complaints about how certain intelligence reports were treated. In addition, we have seen cases from the VA in which whistleblowers appear to have been the subject of retaliation and the individuals against whom they were bringing complaints were rewarded with bonuses and promotions. What would you do to ensure that whistleblowers have easy access to your office and that their complaints are carefully scrutinized, screened, and when appropriate acted upon? Ms. Gibson. Senator Collins, I think you frame it well in your question. It's really a two-part process. One is making sure that people are encouraged to reach out and that they have the information they need to find you to reach out, and that you make it as easy as you can for them to reach out to you, in confidence if necessary. So I think on the front end, if I were confirmed, one of the first things I would do is look at all the policies and processes that are in place to both inform the workforce, to include the contractor employee workforce, which is such a big part of NRO's mission, to inform them of their ability to come to the IG's office with any complaints or concerns, and then to make sure that all of the mechanisms for receiving those complaints and concerns are easy to find, easy to use, and confidential when necessary. So I think that's the front end of it, is to encourage those sorts of complaints and concerns and that they be brought to us. Once they come in, then it's crucial that you handle them appropriately, that you look into them quickly, and that they are a valid complaint, that they're fully investigated, as many of the items that you listed with the VA and Central Command IG's are now looking into those. I think that's very important, for people to know that when once a complaint is brought forward something happens to it. Someone really looks at it and looks at it fully and fairly and takes care of it. If there are reprisals or threats of reprisal for people who bring forward these complaints, as you know, under the IG Act that's considered an urgent concern and it's a very serious matter, and that would require immediate reporting to the Director of the NRO and within seven days to the oversight committees, because it's that serious if there's reprisals or threat of reprisals against potential whistleblowers. I think quick action to take care of anyone who starts a reprisal action or threatens a reprisal action also then feeds the willingness of people to come into the system in the front end and make those complaints and take care of things if that's simply not tolerated on the back end. Senator Collins. Thank you. Some inspectors general have experienced problems in getting access to documents that they need in order to conduct and complete their investigations. Should you encounter that sort of stonewalling or noncooperation with an investigation, would you report that to this committee? Ms. Gibson. Senator Collins, if something like that happened--and it's one of the first things I actually asked the staff at the NRO when they briefed me a few weeks ago, and they assured me that they haven't had those problems there, and I think that says a lot about the office itself. But it's certainly something I would guard against, and if I felt like I wasn't getting the information that I needed I would first try to resolve it at the lowest level. It's typically the best way to go. Sometimes it's a misunderstanding. And I'd bring it to the leadership of the NRO. I'd advise them to work with their general counsel to get advice on whether it was proper to withhold the information. If it came down to it, I would certainly inform this committee and seek whatever assistance I needed, use subpoena authority if appropriate and if necessary. There are many ways to make that happen. And I would certainly inform this committee and request any assistance I thought I needed. Senator Collins. Finally, since my time has almost expired, I would just urge you to focus on NRO's acquisition policies and major acquisitions. In my experience as head of the--when I was Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, which was and is the major oversight committee in the Senate, we found that the IGs were invaluable in identifying acquisition problems, often before they resulted in cost overruns or contract failures, particularly in the information technology area. So I will write a question for the record on that to submit to you. But I would urge you to give that area your attention. Thank you. [The information referred to was not available at the time of publication.] Ms. Gibson. Thank you, Senator. Chairman Burr. Senator Wyden. Senator Wyden. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Gibson, thank you for being here and for your many years of public service. I share the view of the Chair and the Vice Chair. This is a really important job. In particular, your office is in the position of awarding very large government contracts in secret. So it's absolutely essential to have oversight from a strong inspector general. Now, my colleague from Maine has, as is usually the case, asked very good questions on this issue of whistleblowers, and I want to just follow it up in one regard. Chairman Grassley is the chair of the Whistleblowers Caucus. I am the vice chair. As you know, there have been these press reports over the years alleging retaliation against whistleblowers by senior officials. I'm not asking you to confirm the reports, but I think that any NRO employee who read those press reports might conclude that going to the Inspector General to warn that taxpayer dollars are being ripped off could be hazardous to their career. Just two questions: Do you understand why employees would feel that way? Ms. Gibson. Certainly, sir. If they read reports like that, I can understand why they might. Senator Wyden. I'd like to know whether, if confirmed--I believe you will be confirmed; I've heard only good things about your service. When you're confirmed, are you going to have a meeting with the employees and inform them about how they will be protected from retaliation? Because I think that's really one of the keys when there's a history, that somebody new comes in, brings them all together, and says: This is how you will be protected from retaliation. Will you do that? Ms. Gibson. Senator, I'll make it a priority. Senator Wyden. Can't ask for more than that. One last question with respect to kind of policy issues. I think what I've learned over the years is it's typically easier for inspector generals to investigate cases of wrongdoing by a single individual than it is to look at these systemic problems in major programs, because when you look at the bigger problems you often run into resistance. You've got the sort of status quo kind of crowd. How do you plan to ensure that your investigators aren't afraid to ask hard questions and to really look at the big kind of problems, which historically is where you bump up against most resistance? And I think that's what the Vice Chair was talking about with the comments, and I've got a whole sheaf of these comments. How do you think you can help to set the climate so that the big problems are going to be investigated? Ms. Gibson. Senator, I believe that it would start with how you develop your workplan every year. The Investigations Section would be where I would look to for those sort of single bad actor sorts of investigations that you mentioned. I think it's the Inspections and Audits Sections that I would actually look to for these larger, potentially systemic issues. I think speaking with all of the stakeholders, coming to this committee to get your views on things that you may be seeing that you'd like looked into, having an open mind, sitting down and taking the time to sort of step back and get out of the daily grind for a while you work on this long-range plan and think strategically about what the larger problems may be. And I think they've set up a pretty good process for that at NRO that I've seen for developing their work plan. It's something I would want to look into more and perhaps refine after I got there, if I'm confirmed, and roll along as the year goes. I believe they're in the middle of a work year now, so there should be some opportunity coming into the next work year to effect that plan. But I would certainly also look to this committee and the other oversight committees for any systemic issues that you're seeing to feed into that work plan for inspections and audits. Senator Wyden. I'm planning to support your confirmation and look forward to your service. Thank you. Ms. Gibson. Thank you, sir. Chairman Burr. Senator Heinrich. Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for holding this hearing today. I want to say congratulations, Ms. Gibson, on your nomination. Thank you for joining us today for one of our rare open hearings. I see from your record that you not only have a distinguished legal career, but a long and distinguished military career as well. So thank you for your continued service to our country, and I certainly wish you well. The role of the Inspector General is critical. We rely on them and their staffs to conduct robust, independent review and oversight of agency activities, and to give us assurances that federal agencies are meeting the letter and the spirit of the law in carrying out their duties. For these reasons, I'd like to state for the record my concern that the Administration has not nominated a new Inspector General for the CIA in almost a year and a half, ever since David Buckley left the office in January of 2015. A position of such importance should not be vacant and I am disappointed that the Administration has not made this the higher priority. As I noted, the independence of the IG in any agency is central to our confidence that the investigations are conducted objectively and fairly. This benefits both the complainant and the target of an investigation. It's also why this committee took steps to make the NRO IG a presidentially appointed and Senate-confirmed position. In fact, you will be the first NRO IG to be Senate-confirmed, a distinction that I am sure has not been lost on you. Being able to raise difficult issues with senior officials and agency directors is a prerequisite, a necessary quality for an IG. So in your opinion, what are the measurable indicators of real independence for an IG? And more specifically, what actions would you take if a senior IC official sought to somehow prevent you from conducting an adequate audit or investigation? Ms. Gibson. Sir, if I thought that someone, a senior official or anyone, at NRO or in the intelligence community was seeking to impede an investigation or an audit, I would first have a conversation with them if it was a senior official, straight up have that conversation. The Secretary of Defense is the only person that I read about in the statute who has the authority to do that, and only for a vital national security interest, after consultation with the DNI. If it were that sort of a reason, that requires then a notification to the committees that that investigation or audit has been stopped for those reasons. Otherwise, I would come to this committee if I couldn't resolve it myself, if there weren't ways to work through it. I think oftentimes it's just a matter of having open and honest conversations. I'm reminded, quite frankly, of my time in the JAG Corps, which typically we weren't on the firing line and in the front lines, although that's changed over time, unfortunately. We used to talk about those moments as a ``JAG Purple Heart moment,'' where you would go into the office and you just stand up and say what you had to say and take the hits if you took the hits. And like I said, eventually, a day or two later, they would usually come around and say: Thank you; I needed to hear that, and let's work through it. I don't have a problem doing that when I need to, and I think I've had lots of practice at it. And if I need to do it, if I'm confirmed as the IG, I'm ready to do it. Senator Heinrich. I think we all appreciate your candor. It's critical for this role. Although the NRO IG is independently appointed and confirmed, you're still accountable to the IC IG and to the Department of Defense IG. What is your view of those relationships and how will you manage potential disagreements with either entity? Ms. Gibson. Senator, I can't think of a better experience for learning how to deal with the interface between the intelligence community and the DOD than my nearly 11 years at the ODNI, particularly having come out of DOD. I find the more that I deal with these issues, there are rarely conflicts that can't be resolved. Typically, when you get to the bottom of any issue or problem, if you're looking at it in a good government way and a way where you can make helpful progress moving forward, people's interests start to align. That's what I tend to look for when I start seeing those conflicts, as I start looking for where the interests align, and bring both parties to the table and have that open and honest discussion to find those areas. I've found typically, if you do that, you can and you can make progress and move forward in a cooperative way. That's what I would seek to do. Senator Heinrich. I just want to say thank you for your willingness to serve in this position. It takes a lot to put yourself out there, and I think we all appreciate it very much. Ms. Gibson. Thank you, sir. Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman. Chairman Burr. Senator Rubio. Senator Rubio. Thank you. Ms. Gibson, in your opening statement you take credit for helping stand up the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and to rewrite Executive Order 12333. Can you describe--and perhaps you have, and I apologize; I had another committee meeting--your role and how you wrote this order? Ms. Gibson. Initially there was a team of two, me and the Chief of Policy at ODNI, who were given the task of starting to look at, if we were going to update EO-12333--which had not been updated since the IRTPA, which passed in 2004--how would you update it to recognize sort of these new roles, the new interfaces? Much of the executive order had not been updated at all for many, many years. So the missions of the various intelligence community elements. We went into it with an idea of making those updates, with the knowledge that we would make very few changes to Part 2 of the order, which dealt with the privacy and civil liberties protections, and we made very, very few changes to that. We then did what has worked so well in so many other instances. We got the leadership of the intelligence community together and said: Please take off your element hats and tell us what needs improving in this executive order for a more smoothly running intelligence community? We got those inputs and we started drafting. We spent a long time drafting the proposed language. It was very much like my prior experience in negotiating international agreements, quite frankly, by the time we worked our way through. But that was my main role and, quite frankly, it was most of what I did for approximately a year of my time at the ODNI. Senator Rubio. The inspector generals serve an important role in our system in terms of the oversight and ensuring that safeguards are in place. It's crucial that people be able to trust them. So if you're confirmed, can you describe a little bit what you think the best way is to communicate to your workforce that the safeguards afforded to potential whistleblowers are such that any potential whistleblowers would feel comfortable reaching out to the Office of Inspector General? Ms. Gibson. Senator, I think there's two things that an inspector general or anyone can do in those sorts of circumstances. The first thing is you have to say it and you have to say it often, and you have to communicate it well and you have to make it so that people can come to you and feel like they are actually welcome to come to you. Then, once they come to you, you have to follow through appropriately: with an investigation if an investigation is warranted; if there are reprisals or threats of reprisals, by dealing with those promptly and effectively. That creates then a cycle that feeds on itself and that continues to encourage people to come forward. So it's both the communication and the follow-through, which you hope will bring more communication. Senator Rubio. You stated in your response to a prehearing question that there weren't any challenges facing the NRO IG. However, from open press accounts from 2014 it appears there were significant cultural impediments to the independence of the Office of Inspector General. I'm looking at one article in particular, the 28th of October, regarding the deputy director of the National Reconnaissance Office. If you're confirmed, how do you intend to maintain the independence of your office and that of your staff from some of the issues that have been outlined in those 2014 cases? Ms. Gibson. Senator, I think if I were confirmed the fact that I am a Senate-confirmed IG would also add to my independence in that position. I think that was part of the reason for this being made a Senate-confirmed position. So I think that would help, to start with. I think that the office, from what I've seen--and I don't have all the facts of those earlier allegations, but from what I've seen recently--they've already made great strides forward. They have a very strong personnel system that they run internal to the IG, so that others in the NRO can't make personnel decisions that affect the office, but it's the leadership of the IG's office making those decisions. I think that's important. I think it's important for your people to know that if they're feeling those sorts of pressures that they can come to you as the IG and bring those concerns to your attention so that you can deal effectively with them. I think oftentimes for an IG, much like for a general counsel, your role is to be that layer that protects your people from undue influence so that they can accomplish the job that they need to, and I would look to do much the same if I were confirmed as the IG. Chairman Burr. Senator King. Senator King. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Ms. Gibson, who appointed you to this job? Ms. Gibson. I have not been appointed yet, sir. Senator King. Who nominated you for this job? Ms. Gibson. President Obama nominated me. Senator King. I think that's a very important point. You weren't nominated by the head of the NRO or the head of the IC. Everybody has said this, but I want to put a really fine point on it. You have one of the most important jobs in the United States Government, particularly because of the nature of the intelligence community, which is immune from much of the scrutiny of the public in many ways that the Department of Agriculture, the Department of the Interior is, with outside groups and lobbying groups and press and everything else. Therefore we have to have--it's an IG-squared job in my view, that you have to be fiercely independent. I hope you will take that. You use one word in your testimony that made my ears prick up, which was ``partner.'' I don't want you to be anybody's partner over there. I want you to be--my high school football coach used to say he wanted us agile, mobile, and hostile. That's where you have to do this, because this committee can't function without a truly independent IG in these intelligence community agencies that is responsible to the President of the United States and to this Congress. Can you reassure me on this point? Ms. Gibson. Sir, I can assure you that I'd do my very best. I believe that I would be independent. As you state, the nomination from the President, confirmation and appointment if I'm confirmed, would add to that independence. As I mentioned early on, I truly do expect this to be my swan song, so I don't need to be anyone's friend in order to accomplish this job and move on to another job when I finish. I've retired once already, from the Army, and I hope to not retire more than twice, and I hope to do it in the not too distant future. So I don't foresee any problems with independence. I would certainly hope that if you saw any of those problems as the committees who would also help me oversee, that you would let me know that you were concerned about that, because I would see you as a partner in that, sir. Senator King. That's a partnership I approve of. Thank you. Let's move on to the question of contracts. You talked about the limitations on staff and the fact that the NRO administers huge contracts, a lot of taxpayer dollars. How about a force multiplier called the GAO? Do you feel there's a role for the GAO to monitor and assess some of these contracts, just as they do in exactly the same kind of procurement situations in the Department of Defense? Ms. Gibson. Sir, I believe there's a role for the GAO. I know that we've worked out in the intelligence community a lot of that interface in recent years. I think it's a role where you have to complement and coordinate. Otherwise you're wasting resources, oversight resources. So I think it's something that you would want to make sure that you found the appropriate balance. Senator King. But you mentioned in your testimony you need auditors, you need engineers, you need people that are contract administrators. I assume you don't have all of those resources and assets within your office? Ms. Gibson. I do, sir. Senator King. You have all of the resources to adequately assess billion-dollar contracts? Ms. Gibson. From what I have been able to ascertain, I have a very qualified staff. If I am confirmed and I get in and I think I don't have the resources I need, the statute does require that I come to the committees and request the resources that I think are appropriate. I think the one thing that the NRO IG's Office has that is unique is it has the expertise and it has the understanding of the mission, and it does have technical expertise that doesn't reside perhaps elsewhere in the oversight mechanisms. So I would hope that the committee would come to the NRO IG to look at these problems first, and if there were gaps in expertise that were needed, there are also ways to pull in other experts. So again, I think, as I said in my opening, much of oversight is a team sport. The important thing is to make sure that you're putting the right player on the right problem. Senator King. I would urge you to think about and learn about the capacities of the GAO. Senator Coburn and I sponsored an amendment a year ago that allowed the GAO for the first time to play a role in the intelligence community on facilities. I think we need to think further. Again, you're talking about efficiency and resources. We've got an agency that is very capable of doing this function and I urge you to make that a part of your toolkit as you move forward in this position. Finally, I want to compliment you as well, and I'm delighted that you're taking on this challenge. Given your experience both in the JAG Corps and at the IC, I think you're the right person for the right job at the right time. But human nature being what it is, we all want to be friends and popular with our coworkers. You've got to be willing to be difficult and very aggressive, because again this is different from the IG of another agency. This is one where there aren't that many people watching, and that puts a special responsibility, it seems to me, on the job of the IG within the IC. So I want to thank you and I look forward to working with you. Ms. Gibson. Thank you, sir. Chairman Burr. Senator Hirono. Senator Hirono. Thank you. Ms. Gibson, it's good to see you again, and I can echo the comments of my colleagues to say that your job is particularly important because you're dealing with a community of actors for whom transparency is not necessarily their number one priority. So let me ask you this. I know that ODNI has been working in recent years to enhance public understanding about the intelligence community, its authorities and oversight of its activities and programs. The ODNI recognizes that increased transparency in the IC will help increase trust that Americans' civil liberties are protected and that their taxpayer dollars are being well spent. What do you believe is the role of transparency in the Office of the NRO IG, and do you believe there is a way to create unclassified versions of reviews and audits and otherwise make the public more aware of the IG's work than has been done in the past? Ms. Gibson. Thank you, Senator. I will say to start that I'm a firm believer in transparency and have been fully behind the efforts at the ODNI to be more transparent. I agree that we can't always be transparent about exactly what we are doing, but we should be more and more transparent about how we are doing it and what the oversight mechanisms are that are in place to make sure that the authorities that the intelligence community has are not abused. So, first, I'm a proponent of transparency. How many of the IG reports could be released I think would depend on the topic. I think I would look for the topics that can be made public. I know that they've published several of their reports in the past, and I would look to continue to do that. Also, we have worked quite a bit to figure out how to write things so that you separate the classified from the unclassified and not tangle it up to the extent that once you've redacted it that it's hard to understand. So much of it comes with how you write the report and how you explain things. So I would look to continue those sorts of efforts that are in place and be more transparent wherever possible. Senator Hirono. I think that kind of commitment is very necessary as you do your audits and write your reports, because, as you say, if you write it in a way where redacting therefore results in making no sense that does not help the public. In 2012 a former NRO IG was quoted in a news article saying that he wasn't surprised by allegations against an NRO official regarding the handling of contracts. He noted that, and I quote, ``You're talking about a lot of money at this agency and a culture within the intelligence community that isn't really comfortable with the idea of transparency. Generally speaking, people in the agency are ethical, but there is a certain dependency on contractors and closeness with contractors that can create an awkward environment.'' End quote. Do you consider closeness with contractors a problem with the NRO IG and, if so, how would you prevent or minimize this problem? Ms. Gibson. Ma'am, I don't have enough experience yet to say whether there's a problem within the IG's office with contractors. If you're asking about the larger NRO, if confirmed it's certainly something that any IG would have to keep a very close eye on at the NRO. Contractors play a very important role there. They're essential to the mission. But at the same time, they are not government employees and you always have to keep in mind the idea of what is an inherently governmental function and what isn't and who's actually making the decisions, which is I think what's really important when you talk about those inherently governmental functions. The people making the decisions should be government employees and not contractors. So I think it's the sort of thing you would have to keep an eye on at all times. Senator Hirono. Well, human nature being what it is, those who deal with--the government officials who deal with contractors on an ongoing basis--and there's a lot of money at stake--I think that that kind of awkward closeness is particularly of concern. So that is an area that I would think that there should be enhanced scrutiny on your part, to make sure that these kinds of cozy relationships do not result in misuse of taxpayer money. Ms. Gibson. I share your concern, ma'am, and I'll make that a priority if I'm confirmed. Senator Hirono. I have a few more questions, but I think I'll stop here. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Burr. Senator Blunt. Senator Blunt. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman. Ms. Gibson, thanks for being here with us today. The NRO has its feet both in the Title 10 and the Title 50 world. In your statement for the record, you mention the growing risks that you believe are there for the NRO mission. I think a lot of people on this committee believe that better coordination between the space-related activities of the Defense Department and the intelligence community are needed. How do you see your office playing a role in improving the Title 10 and Title 50 relationships? Ms. Gibson. Sir, I see the main place where that relationship comes into play in the way that you're talking about in the requirements process as programs are conceived and plans are built for those programs. So I think the oversight of the IG as those processes work their way through, because those processes are so crucial for both the Title 10 and the Title 50, which are very intertwined at NRO--it's an agency that supports a broad, broad range of requirements. So I think oversight of that requirements process is probably where the IG could be most useful. But I would certainly look for other ways, if I were confirmed, to get at any other connective tissue that really needed a good shaking out and a good look. Senator Blunt. Well, I'll just repeat. I think several people on this committee think that steps in newer directions aren't nearly as clear to us as they might otherwise be, and that would be a place where you could have a view of both departments, both the Title 10 and the Title 50 world, in ways that others don't. You know, you discuss also in your statement your involvement in establishing the Office of the Director of National Intelligence when that was set up and drafting several of the directives involved in setting that up. There are broad efforts, obviously, to foster greater sharing of what's acquired and integrating what we learn from that. What are some of the pitfalls you think face the NRO in accomplishing the tasks that were envisioned by the establishment of the DNI? Ms. Gibson. Senator, I actually think the NRO was probably affected, but not perhaps affected as much as some of the other intelligence community elements, and in the ways that they were affected it's ways that they have helped the change along. So one of the first couple of policies that I actually worked on when I started at the ODNI was the intelligence community directives on major system acquisitions. So this more flexible, spiral development process that was put in place for majority National Intelligence Program-funded major system acquisitions I think was something that the NRO supported, and so it was a cooperative process, if you will, and I think they put a lot of that in place. I've seen a great deal of cooperation. I've seen a lot of maturity in the processes, with the Systems and Resource Analysis Office and the maturity of the cost estimates that are happening and are getting better and better as we go along. Then I'm very, very encouraged actually also by the analysis that's being done for--this is what you hoped to accomplish, these are the requirements you set in place, this is how you thought you would use it, and then to look at it on the back end and say, is that what happened, did you get what you thought you were going to get out of this? If not, why not? So this analysis that's happening between the ODNI in partnership with the NRO and with DOD I think has helped it progress toward more effective and efficient acquisitions. I'm not saying that there isn't still progress to be made. But I do think that they're moving in a hopeful direction there, and if I was confirmed as the IG it's something that I actually feel strongly about and would work diligently to continue improving. Senator Blunt. Well, I would think that it's a great place for the IG to do just exactly the kind of evaluation of what results are being produced versus the goals that were being set that you would have. And certainly your effort in establishing the DNI and working with that is clearly a great background for this job. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Gibson. Thank you, sir. Chairman Burr. Senator Cotton. Senator Cotton. Thank you. Ms. Gibson, thank you for appearing here today, and thank you for once again answering the call to service for our country. I want to associate myself with what Senator King, Senator Hirono, and Senator Blunt have said about the importance of the IG in the intelligence community in general and the NRO in particular because of the often secret nature of the work that you do. And, as Senator Blunt said, the NRO has a dual structure under both the military and the intelligence community. I am one of four members on this committee who also sits on the Armed Services Committee, the only Republican. I'd just like to get the same commitment that you gave to Senator King about this committee of keeping the Armed Services Committee informed where appropriate as well. Ms. Gibson. Absolutely, sir. Senator Cotton. Thank you. You've received some very stellar letters of recommendation from esteemed individuals, such as Chris Inglis and Bob Litt. They say that your character and integrity are of the highest caliber and beyond reproach. I think that's evidenced by your up-front disclosure of a 1999 Army JAG professional responsibility inquiry, which I understand was dismissed as unfounded. Ms. Gibson. Yes, sir. Senator Cotton. Could you simply explain a little bit more about that matter in your own words, for those who have not had a chance to review the thorough explanation of it in writing? Ms. Gibson. Yes, sir. In the mid-1990s I was the Deputy Staff Judge Advocate at Aberdeen Proving Ground. While I was there--they actually sent me to Aberdeen, by the way, to get out of criminal law for a while. Aberdeen Proving Ground is where they try to break things and test things, and it tends to work on contracting instead of criminal law. So I was one of the few senior attorneys there who had much investigative or criminal law experience. While I was there, I was the primary legal advisor for the Ordnance Center and School, which had multiple allegations of sexual assault and sexual abuse of trainees by drill sergeants and instructors. It was a prolonged and very high-profile investigation. When the first round of courts martial were final months later, the Army Inspector General came in and did a thorough review. During that review there was an allegation made that I had inappropriately told investigators not to read rights to certain trainees, Article 31 rights, which are similar to Miranda but also have to include the crime that the person is suspected of. There was a full investigation of that. The Army Inspector General turned it over to the Army JAG Standards of Conduct Office. They conducted a very long and thorough investigation of that, and it was eventually dismissed as unfounded. Senator Cotton. Well, thank you for sharing that for us. I know it was a high-profile matter, and again I think it reflects very well on your character that you've disclosed it up front, as well as that it was dismissed as completely unfounded. And it's also reflected in the fact that the Army continued to put you in positions of greater trust and responsibility, as the intelligence community has as well. Ms. Gibson. Thank you, sir. Senator Cotton. One final question. I note from question 12 of your questionnaire that you are on the board of directors of the City of Fairfax Theatre Company and you are general counsel of Women in Technology. And in question 20 you say that you intend to resign both of those positions. Ms. Gibson. Yes, sir. Senator Cotton. Is that required by law or regulation? Ms. Gibson. It's something that the Administration asks of its nominees and appointees if they're confirmed, so that they can concentrate on the job at hand. Senator Cotton. Do you think being a volunteer member on a city theater company would distract you from your job? Ms. Gibson. I intend to keep volunteering with the theater, sir, but not be on the board. Senator Cotton. Well, I understand that there are some positions outside our work that might conflict with our work, but maybe this committee should examine whether or not we need to require government employees to resign from volunteer positions like boards of directors of volunteer theater companies. I think it's a good thing for government employees to be involved in their community. Ms. Gibson. Thank you for your support, and I can get you tickets for ``The Music Man'' this summer. Senator Blunt. He can't accept them. [Laughter.] Senator Cotton. I can't accept them probably, and probably the appreciation would be lost on me, I suspect. But thank you for again answering the call of service. Ms. Gibson. Thank you, sir. Chairman Burr. I thank my colleagues. If nobody seeks other questions, let me share with members: It is the Vice Chairman's and my intent to vote Ms. Gibson out of committee on Thursday. To our colleagues that are on Armed Services and to the one or two that are on Homeland Security, they also have a sequential process in this. The faster they can choose not to have a hearing, the faster we could get Ms. Gibson to the floor. It's certainly my intent to try to get Ms. Gibson's nomination in place as quickly as we can. So any help that you can be on other committees that have responsibilities, I'm grateful to you. With that, Ms. Gibson, thank you for your testimony today. Thank you for the sacrifices you've given, not only for the military, but in your career with government. We're grateful to the sacrifices your family have made. And the last thing, if you would today, you thank your mother for us. Ms. Gibson. I will, sir. Chairman Burr. This hearing's adjourned. [Whereupon, at 3:33 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] Supplemental Material [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] [all]

Committee Leadership

Tom Cotton

Mark Warner

All Committee Members

Recent Legislation Activity

Hearings & Meetings

Reports & Publications

Committee Resources