U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

79–636 PDF 2013

S. HRG. 112–730 

NOMINATIONS OF THE 112TH CONGRESS, 

SECOND SESSION, PART 2 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

DECEMBER 12, 2012 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

PATTY MURRAY, Washington, Chairman 

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

BERNARD SANDERS, (I) Vermont 

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio 

JIM WEBB, Virginia 

JON TESTER, Montana 

MARK BEGICH, Alaska 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina, Ranking 

Member 

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia 

ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi 

MIKE JOHANNS, Nebraska 

SCOTT P. BROWN, Massachusetts 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

KIM LIPSKY, Staff Director 

LUPE WISSEL, Republican Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

DECEMBER 12, 2012 

SENATORS 

Page 

Murray, Hon. Patty, Chairman, U.S. Senator from Washington ........................ 1 

Burr, Hon. Richard, Ranking Member, U.S. Senator from North Carolina ....... 3 

Sanders, Hon. Bernard, U.S. Senator from Vermont ........................................... 4 

Boozman, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from Arkansas .............................................. 5 

Tester, Hon. Jon, U.S. Senator from Montana ...................................................... 7 

Isakson, Hon. Johnny, U.S. Senator from Georgia ............................................... 67 

Begich, Hon. Mark, U.S. Senator from Alaska ..................................................... 69 

WITNESSES 

Menendez, Hon. Robert, U.S. Senator from New Jersey ...................................... 5 

Greenberg, William S., Nominee to be Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for 

Veterans Claims ................................................................................................... 8 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 9 

Response to prehearing questions submitted by Hon. Richard Burr ........... 10 

Questionnaire for Presidential nominees ....................................................... 21 

Supplemental questionnaire ............................................................................ 30 

Letter from the Judicial Conference of the United States ............................ 42 

Kelly, Keith C., Nominee to be Assistant Secretary of the Veterans’ Employment and Training Service, U.S. Department of Labor .................................... 42 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 44 

Response to prehearing questions submitted by: 

Hon. Patty Murray ........................................................................................ 46 

Hon. Richard Burr ........................................................................................ 48 

Questionnaire for Presidential nominees ....................................................... 52 

Letter from the Office of Government Ethics ................................................. 58 

Letter to the Office of General Counsel, U.S. Department of Veterans 

Affairs ............................................................................................................ 59 

APPENDIX 

McGlew, Charles, Founder, Workforce Data Services LLC; letter ...................... 75 

(1) 

HEARING ON PENDING NOMINATIONS 

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS, Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:03 a.m., in room 

418, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Patty Murray, Chairman 

of the Committee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Murray, Sanders, Tester, Begich, Burr, 

Isakson, and Boozman. 

STATEMENT OF HON. PATTY MURRAY, CHAIRMAN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON 

Chairman MURRAY. Good morning. I welcome all of you to today’s hearing to consider the nominations of William Greenberg, to 

be judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and 

Keith Kelly, to be Assistant Secretary of the Veterans’ Employment 

and Training Service at the Department of Labor. I am very 

pleased this morning to welcome our nominees and their families 

and I congratulate each one of you on your nomination. 

The nominees sitting before us have strong credentials and a history of service. Because we will learn more about their qualifications during their introductions, I will not spend time repeating 

what you will hear shortly, but I would, however, like to briefly discuss the positions for which these two gentlemen have been nominated and the challenges they are going to face. 

Veterans and Members of this Committee know all too well the 

problems confronting the disability claims system, and we know 

that it still takes VA too long to address these decisions. We know 

that VA’s error rate remains too high. We know that the number 

and complexity of claims being filed continues to grow. And we also 

know that the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims occupies a 

unique position as the only national court that reviews veterans’ 

benefit decisions. As a result, the problems that have for far too 

long plagued the disability claims system become the problems of 

the court. 

Mr. Greenberg, if confirmed, you will be confronted with these 

problems. There is no shortage of potential cases that may reach 

the court in the very near future and you will be asked to carry 

a substantial workload. You also must know that, for many veterans, the court is seen as their last hope after fighting for months, 

years, and in some cases decades, to obtain the benefits that they 

have earned. They look to the court for a fair and equitable resolution of their claim. That is why any nomination to the Court of ApVerDate Nov 24 2008 17:45 Mar 15, 2013 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\ACTIVE\121212.TXT PAULIN
2 

peals for Veterans Claims is of such great importance and why any 

vacancy must be filled with a qualified, competent, and motivated 

individual. 

So let me turn to the importance of the role of Assistant Secretary for the Veterans’ Employment and Training Service. With 

the high rate of unemployment among our young veterans and the 

continued draw-down of troops in Afghanistan, ensuring servicemembers have the tools and resources needed to succeed in the civilian workforce has never been more important. The Department 

of Labor plays a critical role in this process. It provides servicemembers with employment and training information through TAP, 

monitors and develops local employment and training opportunities 

for veterans in its Jobs for Veterans State Grants Programs, and 

investigates allegations of wrongdoing under USERRA. 

Mr. Kelly, if confirmed, you will be responsible for overseeing 

these programs and addressing the current employment and training needs of our veterans. Our veterans have the leadership ability, 

discipline, and technical skills to not only find work, but to excel 

in the civilian workplace. But despite all that, we still have a double-digit unemployment rate for our veterans. These veterans cannot find a job to support their families, do not have an income they 

need for stability, and they do not have work that provides them 

with the self-esteem and pride that is so critical to their transition 

home. 

To help address this issue, I introduced and the President signed 

into law the bipartisan, bicameral, and comprehensive VOW to 

Hire Heroes Act of 2011. Among other things, this law calls on 

DOL to partner with Federal, State, and industry officials to eliminate the barriers preventing veterans from using their military 

training to acquire the licenses and credentials needed for civilian 

employment. I have heard from countless veterans in my homestate of Washington and throughout the country who have been 

turned away by employers for not having the proper civilian licenses and certifications, and that should not be the case. The Department of Transportation is now setting an example by working 

with stakeholders to overcome the barriers that prevent veterans 

from successfully transitioning from military service to careers in 

the transportation industry. 

Mr. Kelly, if confirmed, I want to see VETS take on a more active role in addressing licensure and certification issues. 

I also want to take a minute to talk about public-private partnerships. I have been urging companies, large and small, to provide 

employment opportunities for America’s veterans. I have asked 

them to educate their human resources teams about the benefits of 

hiring our veterans and how skills learned in the military actually 

translate into work a company does. I have asked them to provide 

job training and resources for transitioning servicemembers, to 

publicize job openings with Veterans Service Organizations, at local 

military bases to help connect veterans with actual jobs, and to 

work with local one-stop career centers to develop an internal veterans’ group to mentor recently discharged veterans, and to reach 

out to local schools to help develop a pipeline of the many veterans 

that are using our G.I. Bill. 

3 

I am concerned that VETS has not taken an active enough role 

in developing these very critical private-public partnerships, and if 

confirmed, I would like to see you change that. 

So I look forward to hearing your testimony this morning and I 

look forward to learning more about your qualifications for the positions for which you have been nominated, and with that, I would 

like to turn it over to Ranking Member Burr for his opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BURR, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH CAROLINA 

Senator BURR. Good morning, Madam Chairman, and welcome to 

you and to my colleagues. 

I want to also welcome our nominees, Mr. Kelly and Mr. Greenberg, thank you both for your willingness to serve this country. 

Today, the Committee will discuss your qualifications to fill positions that can significantly impact the lives of our Nation’s veterans, their families, and their survivors. 

To start with, the Assistant Secretary for Veterans’ Employment 

and Training will lead an organization that administers employment and training programs for veterans, provides transition assistance to separating servicemembers, and helps enforce laws that 

protect employment rights of military personnel. Mr. Kelly, I appreciate your willingness to take the challenge and to serve in this 

role and I enjoyed the time that we spent together yesterday. 

As you know, some of our Nation’s veterans are facing an unemployment crisis. Even though there have been improvements, the 

unemployment rate for Gulf War II-era veterans still stands at 10 

percent, and the unemployment among our youngest veterans is 

even worse. That is the case even though many of these servicemembers leave the military with skills and training that should be 

easily transferable to civilian employment. But each State has different requirements that veterans may have to meet to obtain the 

licenses and credentials that they need for a civilian career. You 

and I talked about this yesterday. 

Because that can hinder their efforts to get a job, I introduced 

S. 3353, which would require each State to offer a test to veterans 

who have ten or more years of experience in an occupational field 

while in the military. If they pass the test, they would immediately 

be granted the needed license or credentials without additional 

training, without going through an apprenticeship. 

Mr. Kelly, I look forward to working with you on this and other 

ways that we can break down the barriers that our veterans face 

when trying to translate their skills to a civilian career. This can 

be done, and I look forward to working with you. 

This agency also oversees the Transition Assistance Program, or 

TAP, which is supposed to help provide military personnel with the 

information they need to navigate the civilian job market. For the 

first time in 20 years, TAP has been redesigned to try to make it 

relevant to the 21st century military personnel. A key function of 

the Assistant Secretary will be to ensure that these changes are 

actually effective in meeting the needs of transitioning servicemembers. 

4 

On top of that, I am sure you know that this agency experienced 

significant turmoil during the last 18 months after serious procurement irregularities were revealed by the Inspector General. I hope 

you will agree that helping to rebuild that workforce and public 

image and to ensure that these problems are not repeated should 

be among our top priorities. 

Turning to you, Mr. Greenberg, the judges of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims provide justice to sick and injured veterans, their families, who may have already faced years of delays 

and frustrations while seeking benefits from the VA. The judges 

also issue precedential decisions that can have nationwide impact 

on VA claims processing systems and on individuals trying to navigate that system. Given these important responsibilities, candidates to serve on the court must be impartial, well qualified, and 

have sound judicial philosophy and temperament. They must be 

prepared to make decisions fairly, promptly, and efficiently. For 

this court, in particular, which has more than 4,000 pending cases, 

a new judge must be ready to hit the ground running and immediately help the court address the challenges that they face with 

caseload. 

I also want to point out that, in my view, organizations tend to 

function at their best when the integral parts to the operation, like 

judges, are personally engaged on a daily basis. But if judges have 

to travel long distances to get to court, it could make it more difficult. That is why I introduced S. 2045, and my hope is that this 

will pass this body quickly, because it would require that judges of 

the Veterans Court live within 50 miles of the D.C. area, where the 

court is located. A similar residency requirement already applies to 

other Federal judges. 

This bill is simply intended to stress that judges should live near 

enough to the court to allow them face-to-face discussions with 

other judges and allow the judges to be personally involved in the 

day-to-day operations of their chamber and the court. In my view, 

these expectations are completely in line with the Code of Conduct 

for U.S. Judges, which requires that, ‘‘duties of judicial office take 

precedent over all other activities.’’ Madam Chairman, I think this 

is a bill that is simply common sense and I hope the U.S. Senate 

will pass it quickly. 

I want to thank the Chair and again thank the nominees for 

their willingness to be here, and I recognize our colleague, Senator 

Menendez, who is a big champion of Mr. Greenberg. 

Chairman MURRAY. Thank you very much. 

Senator Sanders, do you have an opening statement? 

STATEMENT OF HON. BERNARD SANDERS, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM VERMONT 

Senator SANDERS. I will be very brief because I think Senator 

Murray and Senator Burr made the point that it just so turns out 

that both of you, while strong nominees, are being asked to address 

some of the most serious issues facing the veterans’ community. 

It is no secret that there is a backlog in terms of benefit claims. 

Our goal must be justice, making sure that those people who are 

entitled to the claims get them. But equally important, it must be 

done in an expeditious manner. I know that the VA is wrestling 

5 

with this problem and have gone forward, but we have more work 

to do and that court that you are applying for, Mr. Greenberg, is 

certainly an important part of that whole process. 

And, Mr. Kelly, in terms of employment, we are in the midst of 

a major recession. Unemployment is much too high. But as Senator 

Murray indicated and as Senator Burr made the point, it is especially high for returning veterans. So we have people who, in some 

cases, in my State, where we had a National Guard playing a very, 

very active role, both in Iraq and Afghanistan, folks left their jobs 

and went away and came back, and in some cases those jobs were 

not there for them. 

So I think, as a Nation, we have an absolute obligation to do everything that we can to make sure that people who serve this country get decent jobs, that we take advantage—and I think Senator 

Burr made an important point—people receive a lot of training in 

the military and it is an absolute shame that we do not utilize that 

training to help them into the civilian sector. 

So there is a lot of work in both of the areas that you are applying for and I thank you very much for applying for these jobs. 

Chairman MURRAY. With that, Senator Boozman, do you have an 

opening statement? 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BOOZMAN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM ARKANSAS 

Senator BOOZMAN. Briefly, I look forward to Mr. Greenberg’s testimony. I had a good visit with Mr. Kelly and was really impressed 

with a number of ideas that he has to try to address some of the 

problems that you all brought up. So, again, like I said, I look forward to your testimony. 

Chairman MURRAY. All right. Senator Tester, do you have an 

opening statement beyond what we are going to have you do in a 

few minutes to introduce Mr. Kelly? 

Senator TESTER. I will do that when you tell me to. [Laughter.] 

Chairman MURRAY. OK. 

Senator TESTER. I would just say one thing, Chairman Murray, 

before we start with this hearing, and that is today is the 12th day 

of the 12th month of 2012, and this may be our last Veterans’ Affairs Committee meeting. I just want to thank you for your vision 

and your leadership for these 2 years. 

Chairman MURRAY. Well, Senator Tester, I appreciate that very 

much. And my grandson is turning 12 today, so it is a very amazing day in my family, as well. He has only been counting days until 

this day for, like, 8 years, so—— 

[Laughter.] 

Chairman MURRAY. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. 

With that, Senator Menendez, I will turn it over to you for your 

introduction. 

STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT MENENDEZ, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY 

Senator MENENDEZ. Well, thank you, Madam Chair and Senator 

Burr and distinguished Members of the Committee, and I hope this 

is not your last meeting because I hope you have a business meeting to be able to vote out these nominees. 

6 

I am pleased to be here today to introduce a friend and a fierce 

advocate for the men and women who have served in uniform. Retired Brigadier General William Greenberg is about as passionate 

and committed to our veterans as anyone I have ever met. He does 

not just talk the talk, he walks the walk. He has stood for veterans 

and shown courage in living his values. 

I have known Bill Greenberg and his wife, Tina, for a couple decades, and I have always known him to be a man who has never 

been afraid to speak truth to power. He has had several distinguished careers: soldier, lawyer, author, professor, public servant, 

and he has excelled in each of them. 

In 2009, he was appointed by the Secretary of Defense and approved by the President to be Chairman of the Reserve Forces Policy Board, where he received the Secretary of Defense Medal for 

Distinguished Public Service and the praise of his colleagues. 

When he began his career in 1967, he was selected as the Outstanding Cavalry Trooper of the Training Cycle at Fort Knox. He 

later was commissioned in the Judge Advocate General Corps in 

1970 and served in various JAG positions in the Reserves, until his 

promotion to flag rank in 1990. He is a partner in one of New Jersey’s oldest and the region’s most respected law firms, McCarter 

and English. 

He has served as a New Jersey State Commissioner of Investigation, Assistant Counsel to the Governor of New Jersey, Trustee of 

the New Jersey State Bar Association, and their first Adjunct Professor of Military Law at Seton Hall University School of Law. He 

received the Distinguished Alumnus Award from Johns Hopkins in 

2010, the Rutgers Law School Alumni Association Prestigious Public Service award. But those long lists of accomplishments do not 

tell the real story and the real commitment of Brigadier General 

Bill Greenberg. 

In June 2009, Bill received the highest award of the New Jersey 

State Bar Foundation’s Medal of Honor for his tireless, extraordinary work with wounded soldiers at Walter Reed. What he has 

done to stand up for veterans, no matter who he had to engage or 

how powerful they might have been, he did what he believed needed to be done for the people he served, and that is an extraordinary 

measure. 

During the last several years, he has personally, and together 

with members of the firm that he put together, represented pro 

bono more than 50 soldiers in hearings at Walter Reed and elsewhere to make certain that they received all the care and help for 

their combat wounds and injuries that they deserved. 

He cares deeply and profoundly about the men and women who 

have served in this Nation. He has demonstrated a combination of 

public service and private accomplishment to which all citizen soldiers should aspire. 

General Greenberg has dedicated himself to the highest ideals of 

our Nation, among them, making sure that those who are wounded 

in service to this Nation are treated with nothing less than the utmost care and with the fairness and dignity that they have earned 

and deserve. 

Madam Chairman and Members of the Committee, I cannot 

think of a more qualified citizen soldier to preside over matters 

7 

concerning the men and women he has devoted a lifetime to helping. I am proud of his service, proud that he is from New Jersey, 

honored to call him a friend. He has the intellect, the experience, 

the judicial temperament, and the respect for precedent that would 

make him an extraordinary member of the court. I look forward to 

his, I hope, unanimous support in the Senate and for him to get 

to work on behalf of our veterans. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Chairman MURRAY. Thank you very much, Senator Menendez. 

We really appreciate your coming and introducing him. 

Senator Tester, I turn to you for your introduction of Mr. Kelly. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA 

Senator TESTER. Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. It is my honor 

to introduce a good friend of mine, Keith Kelly. I want to thank 

Keith for being here today and thank you for your service. 

Keith and I have known each other for a long, long time. It has 

not been 35 years. As I was doing the math in my head, it has been 

31 years since I first met Keith, when I was younger and he was 

younger, too. I had the good fortune to work with him when I was 

in the State Legislature. His lovely wife, Norma Jean, is not here, 

but be sure to send her my best. 

Currently, Keith is Commissioner of Montana Labor and Industry. In that role, he works hard to promote the well-being of Montana’s workers. 

Keith is also a veteran. He served in the U.S. Army in the Vietnam War, earned a Combat Infantry Badge and a Bronze Star. 

After returning from military service, Keith began 35 years in 

public service. He has served as Director of both Montana’s and Arizona’s Department of Agriculture. Under President Clinton, he 

served as a National Administrator for the Farm Service Agency. 

By all accounts, Keith has done a great job in all of the positions 

that he has held and he has valuable experience dealing with 

issues from the local, State, and Federal perspective. 

I know that he has always been mindful, in particular, of the 

needs of our Nation’s veterans. If confirmed, I have no doubt that 

he will do absolutely everything within his power to ensure that we 

fulfill our commitment to the promises that we have made our veterans and their families. 

So, Keith, I want to once again thank you for your public service, 

for your record in that; I want to thank you for putting yourself 

through this exercise for confirmation, and thanks for being here 

today. 

Chairman MURRAY. Thank you very much, Senator Tester. 

Mr. Kelly, I understand your family is cheering you on from 

home, so they are not with you, but Mr. Greenberg, I understand 

you do have some family members here. If you would like to introduce them, we would love to—— 

Mr. GREENBERG. Yes. There are some at home, but my wife, 

Tina, is here and my son, Tony, who works in Washington, is also 

here today. 

Chairman MURRAY. All right. Great. Well, thank you very much. 

Mr. Kelly, I understand your family is at home cheering you on. 

8 

Mr. KELLY. Yes, and thank you. I hope they are, yes. [Laughter.] 

Chairman MURRAY. All right. With that, under the rules of this 

Committee, the testimony of all Presidential nominees appearing 

before the Committee has to be taken under oath. So, Mr. Greenberg and Mr. Kelly, I would like you to stand right now and we 

will administer the oath. Please raise your right hand. 

Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are 

about to give before the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs will 

be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help 

you God? 

Mr. GREENBERG. I do. 

Mr. KELLY. I do. 

Chairman MURRAY. Thank you very much. You may be seated. 

Mr. Greenberg, we will start with your testimony, and then we 

will turn to Mr. Kelly. 

TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM S. GREENBERG, NOMINEE TO BE 

JUDGE, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS 

Mr. GREENBERG. Thank you, Chairman Murray, Ranking Member Burr, and distinguished Members of the Committee. I would 

like to thank Senator Menendez, also, for his very kind and gracious words. We do go back a long way. 

I am honored to have been nominated by the President to be a 

judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and I am 

grateful for the opportunity to appear before you today. 

With me, as I have just indicated, is my wife, Tina, who has been 

my best friend, partner, and principal support throughout my professional life and whose tireless generosity of spirit and family history of philanthropy have been shining examples to our three children—our daughters, Katherine and Elizabeth, and our son, Anthony, who is with us today. I am indebted to all of them for love, 

patience, and confidence. 

I also wish to acknowledge my large extended family, law partners, and clients for their enthusiastic support of my nomination. 

I would like to pay special tribute to those who have served as 

exemplars over my long legal and military career. To Judge Robert 

A. Matthews, for whom I served as a Law Secretary, a Navy war 

hero who reminded me always to act in the name of the ethic, 

which gives meaning to it all. To Frank McCarter, a veteran of the 

Italian Campaign; Gene Haring and John McGoldrick, partners 

and mentors at McCarter and English; to Richard J. Hughes, Governor and later Chief Justice of New Jersey, from whom I learned 

the meaning of political and legal courage; and finally, to Major 

General Frank Gerard, the last active duty air ace of World War 

II, for whom I served as military subordinate, legal advisor, and 

advocate. 

In a larger sense, I owe my career to the example set by my father, uncles, and great-uncles, as well as my brother, all of whom 

served in the Armed Forces. Some were in combat, and others, like 

my father, Master Sergeant Irving Greenberg of the Medical Service Corps, and brother Major Stephen Greenberg of the Medical 

Corps, served those who bore the physical and psychological 

wounds of battle. 

9 

During my 27 years in the Reserve components of the Army, I 

was an enlisted scout, an Army lawyer, and a flag officer. With 

that experience and my nearly four decades of private law practice, 

I recognized a need after the events of September 11 and established the New Jersey Military Law Institute and the New Jersey 

State Bar Association Legal Assistance Program. 

During the past 10 years, I have been privileged to guide both 

endeavors in the pro bono service of Reservists wounded in Iraq 

and Afghanistan. We at New Jersey’s oldest and largest law firm 

took the lead, together with the organized Bar, in representing 

these soldiers in their physical evaluation board hearings at Walter 

Reed and their claims in the regional offices of the Department of 

Veterans Affairs. I personally tried cases and supervised the work 

of our firm in dozens of matters over the past decade. Many of the 

lawyers who work with me had no prior military experience, but 

quickly gained the confidence of the soldier and were themselves 

rewarded by a strong sense of their unique accomplishment. There 

is no substitute for individual personal relationships between lawyer and soldier or veteran. 

During my 45 years of private law practice, I have been fortunate to have served in many other facets of life, which I, with great 

respect, believe will serve me well if I am confirmed. I have been 

a Commissioner of the New Jersey State Commission of investigation, Chairman of the New Jersey State Bar Association Judicial 

and Prosecutorial Appointments Committee, the first Adjunct Professor of Military Law at the Seton Hall University, President or 

Trustee of New Jersey’s two largest Bar Associations, a member of 

the New York City Bar Association Committee on Law and Justice, 

and more recently as Chairman of the Reserve Forces Policy Board 

in the Office of Secretary of Defense. 

I have always been an advocate for the soldier and the veteran. 

My entire legal career has been in litigation, advising clients, and 

representing them before agencies and in courts. I believe I understand the importance and significance of becoming a judge of the 

U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. 

I fully comprehend the responsibility of that honored position. If 

confirmed, I believe I would apply the same zealousness and intellectual vigor as a judge that I have as counsel. I am equally certain 

that I will be true to the oath requiring swift, fair, and impartial 

appellate review. 

I thank the Committee most sincerely for considering my nomination. Chairman Murray, I am pleased to respond to any questions you or any Member of the Committee may have. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Greenberg follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF WILLIAM S. GREENBERG, NOMINEE FOR JUDGE OF THE

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS

Thank you Chairman Murray, Ranking Member Burr, and distinguished Members of the Committee. I am honored to have been nominated by the President to 

be a Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and I am 

grateful for the opportunity to appear before you today. 

With me is my wife, Tina, who has been my best friend, partner, and principal 

support, throughout my professional life and whose tireless generosity of spirit and 

family history of philanthropy have been shining examples to our three children, 

Katherine, Anthony, and Elizabeth. I am indebted to all of them for love, patience, 

10 

and confidence. I also wish to acknowledge my large extended family, law partners, 

and clients for their enthusiastic support of my nomination. 

I would like to pay special tribute to those who have served as exemplars over 

my long legal and military career. To Judge Robert A. Matthews, for whom I served 

as Law Secretary, a Navy war hero who reminded me always to act in the name 

of the ethic, which gives meaning to it all. To Frank McCarter, a veteran of the 

Italian Campaign, Gene Haring, and John McGoldrick, partners and mentors at 

McCarter and English. To Richard J. Hughes, Governor and later Chief Justice of 

New Jersey, from whom I learned the meaning of political and legal courage. And 

finally, to Major General Frank Gerard, the last active duty air ace of World War 

II for whom I served as military subordinate, legal advisor, and advocate. 

In a larger sense, I owe my career to the example set by my father, uncles and 

great uncles, as well as my brother, all of whom served in the Armed Forces. Some 

were in combat, and others like my father, Master Sergeant Irving Greenberg of the 

Medical Service Corps, and brother Major Stephen Greenberg of the Medical Corps 

served those who bore the physical and psychological wounds of battle. During my 

twenty-seven years in the Reserve Components of the Army, I was an enlisted scout, 

an army lawyer, and a flag officer. With that experience, and my nearly four decades of private law practice, I recognized a need after the events of September 11, 

and established the New Jersey Military Law Institute and the New Jersey State 

Bar Association Legal Assistance Program. During the past ten years, I have been 

privileged to guide both endeavors, in the pro bono service of reservists wounded 

in Iraq and Afghanistan. We at New Jersey’s oldest and largest law firm took the 

lead, together with the organized Bar, in representing these soldiers in their Physical Evaluation Board hearings at Walter Reed, and their claims in the regional offices of the Department of Veterans Affairs. I personally tried cases and supervised 

the work of our firm in dozens of matters over the past decade. Many of the lawyers 

who worked with me had no prior military experience but quickly gained the confidence of the soldier and were themselves rewarded by a strong sense of unique 

accomplishment. There is no substitute for the individual personal relationship between lawyer and soldier or veteran. 

During my forty-five years of private law practice, I have been fortunate to have 

served in many other facets of life which I respectfully believe will serve me well 

if I am confirmed. I have been a Commissioner of the New Jersey State Commission 

of Investigation, Chairman of the New Jersey State Bar Association Judicial and 

Prosecutorial Appointments Committee, the first Adjunct Professor of Military Law 

at Seton Hall University Law School, President or Trustee of New Jersey’s two largest Bar Associations, a member of the New York City Bar Association Committee 

on Military Law and Justice, and more recently as Chairman of the Reserve Forces 

Policy Board in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. 

I have always been an advocate for the soldier and the veteran. My entire legal 

career has been in litigation, advising clients and representing them before agencies 

and in courts. I believe I understand the importance and significance of becoming 

a Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. I fully comprehend the responsibility of that honored position. If confirmed, I believe I would 

apply the same zealousness and intellectual vigor as a judge, as I have as counsel. 

I am equally certain that I will be true to the oath requiring swift, fair, and impartial appellate review. 

I thank the Committee most sincerely for considering my nomination. 

Chairman Murray, I am pleased to respond to any questions you or any Member 

of the Committee may have. 

RESPONSE TO PREHEARING QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. RICHARD BURR TO

WILLIAM S. GREENBERG, NOMINEE TO BE JUDGE, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR

VETERANS CLAIMS

PUBLIC

Question 1. According to the questionnaire you submitted to the Committee, you 

were admitted to practice before the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in 

approximately 2010. It also reflects that you have represented military personnel involved in a medical evaluation board (MEB) or physical evaluation board (PEB). 

A. Would you please describe approximately how many claimants you have represented before VA and the general nature of the cases you have handled? 

Response. Our firm, McCarter & English, has represented approximately, pro 

bono, 70 to 80 soldiers or veterans. Of these, approximately 10 to 20 at the regional 

offices of the VA. While I had general supervisory responsibility for each of these 

11 

cases, the VA matters were handled directly by my partners with the aid of 

associates. 

B. Would you please describe any training you have completed in the area of veterans’ law? 

Response. My training has been on the job training, including developing a knowledge of VA procedures and practices, as well as a comprehensive review of the case 

law, in preparation for teaching the Veterans Rights portion of the Seton Hall Military Law Course, and as the partner in charge of our individual cases. 

C. Would you please describe approximately how many servicemembers you have 

represented at the MEB phase of the disability evaluation process and at the PEB 

phase and the general nature of the cases you handled? 

Response. I had personal responsibility for approximately 10 to 20 of the PEB 

cases. I personally appeared at the hearings before the physical disability board at 

Walter Reed in approximately 10 cases between June 2007 and August 2009. I believe we were able to settle many other cases without appearing in person. I believe 

lawyers were not expected, nor permitted at the MEB stage. I believe that has 

changed recently. During the period 2009 through 2011, while serving as Chairman 

of the Reserve Forces Policy Board in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, I did 

not think it appropriate to personally represent individual soldiers or veterans in 

individual cases. 

Question 2. The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims generally 

hears appeals from claimants seeking benefits from VA. 

A. How has your background equipped you to serve as an appellate judge? 

Response. I believe, respectfully, that I am qualified to serve as an appellate judge 

because of my personal representation of individual soldiers and veterans over the 

past 5 years; my 45 years of private law practice in trial and appellate courts, at 

the state and Federal levels; my experience as Chairman of the New Jersey State 

Bar Association Judicial and Prosecutorial Appointments Committee; and my 27 

years as an enlisted, officer and flag officer in the Reserve Components of the Army. 

B. Have you previously sought any other judicial positions? If so, please explain. 

Response. While I did not seek judicial positions, I was invited to participate as 

a candidate for Federal judicial positions by United States Senators from New Jersey in 1978, 1998, and 2002. 

Question 3. A biography published on the Web site for McCarter & English indicates that you have ‘‘written regularly for legal periodicals and other publications’’ 

and ‘‘authored more than twenty five articles or monographs on litigation matters.’’ 

A. Would you please identify the legal periodicals and other publications for which 

you have written, other than those identified in your completed questionnaire? 

Response. None of the periodicals or publications referred to were written during 

the past 10 years, with the exception of the June 2007 article in New Jersey Lawyer 

(attached below). 

Also, if it may be response I also assisted in the creation of a video to educate 

returning reservists about their legal rights. The video can be seen at: http://www. 

njsba.com/resources/probono/military-legal-assistance/index.html 

The articles generally refer to materials distributed as part of presentations at 

professional conferences and included a wide variety of subject matters. I do not 

presently have access to those articles or materials. To the best of my recollection, 

they were presentations at meetings of the young lawyers or litigation sections of 

the American Bar Association, and on matters covering environmental litigation for 

the natural resources section of the ABA. I lectured at the New Jersey Institute for 

Continuing Legal Education, and prepared articles or materials related to those lectures on a wide variety of subjects including Trying the Constitutional Tort Case, 

Trying the School Law Case and Dealing or Litigating with the Resolution Trust 

Corporation. I also prepared materials for, and lectured at, annual meetings of the 

International Bridge Tunnel and Turnpike Association, generally related to environmental litigation. I also believe I wrote for, and lectured to, meetings of the New 

Jersey Education Association, and the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, and 

its New Jersey affiliate. 

12 

ATTACHMENT—JUNE 2007 ARTICLE, NEW JERSEY LAWYER


1212GreArtNJ1.eps

OOeringMitftary: legal ASSi&tancetpth~ NeW Jersey~: The __ Bar 

A,s.~·$RMpoose 

by William S. Greenberg 

Qnthe coverllfthe Ml!R;h 20; 2007,edltiml cOt the New Yot'kerappEfared Ii 

haunting and alllbfsueu&reminderOftlle'na(km at war. A wounded soldIer in oombat 

Qnlform, ina wheeieilaif< at the 1;)o'ttQrn of .s_and.daun(ing sta~leading to a 

medicalftjQfjty, wasaJone. Preo~dWith()~tma_we\l!. three medicat 

pefSon~ intlta stalid8fd ligbt blue of b:ospilalworlef'sJ obliVIous to tbe existet1(:e and 

the plight of the soldier. 

ThiS .comtlatvetal'anmigbtfialle taCet;l. the very ~me challenges if It were Maroh 

t967, 1951. 1943, 1:918,« &VeFl1fi3An eaclt"Ofthos.e~rsunredeemecJpronlises of 

medical and fioancial care had been made, Ill. each. of those ~fS, the-tawas no enclin 

sigbUo a warln 1MbichthesQfdieI'$~ andS:tlffered. In each Qfthose yeats ptans. -

were already beiA9foimulated, .and ~~un. ·.k>.treat thepbysicatarui 

emotional wOURdsof war. bY ~:mmel'lt andpriv{lteorganizatiQns. 

In $apt. 2O{)U, the- ~V1(JeI'SeYSlat~S<\r ~pirion Jaunehed utructured 

program:of ptlbliPsi'!Nite ditl!dedto:atl~ Jer~yRe$e1V:e ~t J)etsQnnel 

C1led to aCtiVe duty and deployed to lflK'jor Afgl')8nlsllJrI a~ $apt. 11. 2001. 

Not.aK ofthegriev.ous oorlseq~t:eSof war$u~by thesotElier I:Iepicted on 

Th&New YQft(er COlleriilre po$$ibleloredressWith theimplemen_n oftlte NJSBA 
13 


1212GreArtNJ2.eps

program, but participants areman!festlyat work, doing thek part in the war effortfof the 

service members regardlesS of theIr view of this or any war. 

ThePl'ogram 

Each participating lawyer registers with the program office at the New Jersey 

Law Center and !iststhe area ofiawor legal sped~!ties he or she is willing to provide in 

litigation or iitigatjon~d!recled legal assistance. It is not necessary to be proficient, or 

even knowledgeable in military law, nor in the substantive law particular to the status of 

the client asa Reserve service member. 

The important element for the volunteer lawYer is the. comfort level with litigation, 

or representation likeiy to lead to litigatlon,.in the particular specialty or area oUhe law. 

The NJSBA program is intendedtopwvide representation to eligible service members 

when aU other efforts afsettlement or redress have failed, and litigation is tile most likely 

means of providing a remedy. Litigation includes tra.ditional court proceedings, 

administrative agency determinations, and alternate dispute resolution pro.ceedings, 

including arbitration and mediation. 

2 
14 


1212GreArtNJ3.eps

The arrntl.dfCJrees are:. umJbfflfo,provi4eallRifQ~ ~ qtli!!:tifie4to flijilresent 

the ~~metnbi!!r ittcivilitfl\JCillion.elUllir beeause mlack of laWyef resotlf(:E!S:or 

because military re,gul~tiOmlproh~StlPh~tioO. \MI1te the militalY 

estabf~mentM$c rec::eoll¥ ~f!i4llOnsideta/i1Ie,~$'Gltr~ ·toinoreasir!9lega1 

assistan.ee: (tl militmyterm &fatt.~Uy :ent;l:'impa~ing alleMI mattersin'lolvif'\g 

it:ldMdua! sttfi:liers}, ~ isinslrlfffl;iEltltPJ1fS~f1~alld·uMWenge9g.i(:alofStrlbutkm 

of mllitarylaW}lers, tOprevige a s't'abieSOI,/l'C& Oftepte$eA~iofl now,·aflli in the 

fores~ fUklre. Thisl1'l4lkes,$ .tal>Sis_cep~rgmapraclJ~I~tty for 

tb.~ troops. 

Expeiie;tcehir,! 'lon9 ... ~ . .a.~OQ(lpredictOr or.wllat.tbeprogram maye~pect) and 

thereftm! wIlat.the ~mlm willne.ed.l)y'way ofla..-!lf;lIUllteerspecUdty.AIlJegal 

assiStan'Ce ist;wiI.Themirllatyp~id$Ia~ef.$in cOmlflalor rnifitaryjasU¢e cases. To 

the e~nt thatthef&.i&a (livUlaw~oon*t<r~1isan''es~(ial'rquaskrlmiflal or 

ciimin$ rfIiltM,ou~'fll'Q9ram .~f.$ •. ~~~~Bl!l:the:h~,and.·souldftllis 

~ram istO"provk:le fc!lrtWl3seWice~~r.R1:ttlft·tWeWdaY8@a's ~ter~ by 

civilians and theirattonieys. 

Ell'IJt)loyment:.and.reempl~tfi{ftil$and:.res~'bIlities; ~ltC)rand~or 

relafiQ(lstJipSfmatrimmiialaQtffamiIY ma~rs, 'esp~dwor£& and custOdY. al'ld 

acce$ to~ns._ ~ermi~ry mediE:aJ..andfinattcifitl and~a.1 ~iGe 

benefits, are th~be~~ues.opon~ ~PliQ!IfIiIl'l'Iltas been eetsblished • 

. From HtgtrP~l'lt to Cap~l'I4a¥fawyem''''a~vQ/pnteeredferl'hQState Sa, 

Pr~ adm~atNew·atui!l~. T~ty.NeWJe~ J)a.rtn~f$ at~arter& 

ME16l1IS1IZv.l 
15 


1212GreArtNJ4.eps

EngliSh aIonei.ha\ite~e~dto~rti~. ··The prog~mmllst~fGWltImu~.awarerleS$ 

created. byaltiGtess~pt\ a~ .lliS,.b,y.~Ei;~(9)'to.th •. New~yAl>$:etnt)lY: Mititary 

Al'ldVetetansA1'fail$ Ca~lttee;~ve~d·~· .~·~,tbI'OJ$Ilt.l'l&. ann"""tnilitary 

law lnstiiute in ApFiI, and by indMdual.Eq:>~r~.~QrQe£)lIffl;Y and $pe~I:l:>ar 

as~tiansdufing :the~JewmOl'ltlts. ·1I46$tlm~mthee.aJlSiOftofthls 

pr(lf;/Fanl.MItbe:_Jl!lwerof~.Qt(~tIiJ~a$jOn,Ia'WyEJt to \aWYEIf: 

~iIe we.ate~Qfking~~(ln f1uflliJdivitltta.~~afl'dc/ients.we must 1:1& 

6tlildingtbe pr~tam th'tQl:@lvt)I»hJ:~f:Ia~w:Jm:.beavailablefor·.lheaHbf:lt 

ce~in drallfatlC.j~iti¢l(jn~tbat~newtf~.~~nls .. an<.fthe ultimate end 

of the:watWillen~. 

The pl'elJ$maliWatltib\AA~~~~iOI:I:p9f$t.(st~iZing~r NewJ-.y 

~rs. tralmng.pr()!iJr.JmsQeatetUp.fite;~p!cial,JI~$;'of~uI' ~ists.aM.tIi&.special 

feql:l~nt$of~taland~l_whetl~e~~_lSar:e,tI1e $UIiJ~ofGivil or 

adrmniStra}Well!gal pf~e:din!lS, 

.Finally, l.tte protJ~lnatiti~sfitat.pe~with~lre$pomiillillity 

am:ttllient~,appl'Opriafe~·~~itiQn;Olli& ~volyl\teerwitlbe: offered 

byca 9i'ateiulnation,SUtte andlOt8fpra~ R'lgifJrl. 

MEl 628SH2v.l 
16 


1212GreArtNJ5.eps

AIIN_~YteSidefIIs:~~fIi~~·maetiveduty after September: 11. 

2001, as membeJiSc QfaJE$eNe:eo:m~~fof~;armadforces,whoweredepf9yed to, 

oroverseas.in support of; kat:! orAf1l11~~~ eligible. The only other requirement Is 

that the ~lorlegal assiSfanee a~e.otfUil~m[ltSl'ystm$ofthe servioemember 

and was the l'EI$!lft :Qf:fhe·call tp a~iVe d~; 

for exam..-; a~roftb&;New>Yt)fi(,Army~I\'\81~uard.but a resident of 

New Jersey ;Oti·aetNe·d:uty·jn.l~;Ia~ntt1fed·;to·i:h&bel1_ oftbe ~tam:inlil' dispute 

with t:ti& laruit.Ol'(t olferttlntQit~fease~i$ions .. wtBGh~be(laQSecofhls 

depkNment.· Qn t~o~ "and; a:meft'lber Of ~Arrny~e also aNew Jenseyan; 

who itl'deptOyed a.{leT SAAteri.1&er 11. !1lO1.su~$Sfutr,;~tes th& depleYf:ner:lt .and 

leaves mill.., serviCe. and tIlerea_t Wl~$ ibloa~eiis inelig1tile for the pro!)tam 

wOen a subsequentdlsptlte;arj$e$betWeetliafldJ9t1i1and _.rsemoemember tenant 

In short, tbe~9ram is itltended for1t!ewr~Ati:otioi'n'ler;~fltlst; who, btIJ for 

deploymeflttoQf in sll,pQitof.trac( Q"'.NJJi" ~ndt:ba~ had:thespecifiociVil 

liflgatiOn Probleltl. 

A helpM ~yofr~ .• tIle.s~m~·Md·lbeSfle'ciflCjntent:betmtd this 

pregt.8n'l is· ti) eXi!ininE!~fiHi~nf~~MP!lr:pos. behind.fi1e.{wo most impoo:am 

fecferalstatateSlo ~Is I:lMi~ ofml~l~ahls~e. 

): 

bilEl 62J1SII2v.1 
17 


1212GreArtNJ6.eps

The Servicemembers Civil Relief Acf,effecHve in December2003, had its origin 

in 1918 and 1940. Among itSPllfposeswereprovisiol1sfor, anOstfengl.hening and 

expediting fhe national defellse "throughpmtecUon ... toservicemembers ... to 

enable. ,.{them) ... to devote their entire energyfo the defense needs oUne Nation"; and 

"to provide for the temporary suspension of ... proceedings., _ that may adversely affect 

Ihe civil rights of servicemembersduring tMirmHitaryservica". 50 Appendix USCA 501, 

502. 

The Unlforme<;iServjcasEmpfoymentAnd Reemployment Rights Acl, effective in 

October ,1996, was intemled "to encourage non career service ... by eliminating or 

minimizing the disadvantages tocilliliancare(j!f$. and employment... to the 

disruption· to the . lives of persons performing service, _. as well as to the employers. 

fellow employees, <llld .their communities,. by p,oviding .. _prompt 

reemployment" and; .. prohibits cHscrimination against persoos because of their service 

in the uniformed services". 38USCA4301. 

The spititof tha !a.whas been.enforcedand reinforced through many state Md 

federal proceedings over the years, and much litigation is to be expected because of the 

complexity of some specific provisions ahd because of ever changing attitudes of courts 

and employers to military .serviCe. This is particularly true with regard to reserve 

components service in time of war. It is well to remember thatlhis· is the first truly 

extended period of war since the .end of conscription in 1973, antHhe flrstwarwithout 

6 MEl 62&51 12v I 
18 


1212GreArtNJ7.eps

full ~~·natiOnalmQb.atiQfl whi~nasde;~(fEjd~liIb$tal1tially UJilOfl tI'\e(fEjf?byment 

of$lrat~gif}~fVe ~I'I1PQJ'leAt& fPr'tbe tactfeal ~tiQA Q.f.ttie war. 

New' JelS$Y Wit! tacerooretball ·tbe<fa:ir sttamofq4ica/and·fNflCiaI dvil 

litigatiOn pr.~ali.iSiBg {t.mtlle oepk)yfl;t,entJiI14~yment.ofreser:ve ~ent 

f.rces. Whenlhere istni$ ·Jev:el·of oommilment. 

.Ouringthe pastyearilll)ne, in aJWgi~@r.'1h, 1he nUJ.'tjQer Qf!:tlSefVists 

<iepf~d ,in IraqorAtahanistanb~~en~rt rt~<th'II.lsand ~J)d·.Qne huildred 

and fen 1housilnd. Atanyglv:enfi~.ltte aVEn'age GQI1'IPQStt«m of allllle'loyedf.rcSs 

Ita inCluded frorrt . .forty to. fillY Mf~l'It~$Js~ . More im!n: ha/ftilemarrledreservists 

repQrta lossllfinG&1'!\& becau~Qt·njo'i1izatkln; T~ quarters of reservists cite fa:milV 

bUrdeps ;;i${be reason 10 teavethe~. MnreWi"lnflalfcite too manydep/oymems 

as tile ~nfor ~Wfl,f,rthe.m:lIjl~. tfle;see;U$~nt CifDefefls,e J\nnual 

Survey Of The $tatusOfFll"*S~ 

Th~ statisfjo$, recentpubltt.~$Qf~l:ICtatre bOOOlilllJin themilitafy 

and vetefans mecHeatand S'o.Eriat&eMees.~t:eaiafarmore senlltfS #treat tllthe fabrlc 

ofOOf militaryandto.ouf SQci~.WlIll~than.QrJemillkm militarypel'sorl,nel woo will 

have beend~ed·amlre~pl()~fQQ)m.torc.mbatsupP(lft:beforetlle end of this 

Year, half of mom Wl1.lnavei1een ~~ts,tIletimfJf~fV~~teers, .8fldpubllc service 

among New .Jel11ey~ isl1GW. 
19 

B. If any of those writings were during the past ten years, please provide copies 

to the Committee. 

Response. I believe the only writing during the past 10 years is attached. The 

Committee should also know that during the past 10 years as author, editor, and 

supervisor of the editorial staff, I devoted considerable time and energy to revisions 

and annual supplements of the New Jersey Practice Series, Volume 47, Civil Trial 

Handbook, published by Thomson Reuters, and now approximately 1400 pages, including the cumulative annual supplement. 

Question 4. In response to question 6 of the Supplemental Questionnaire, you 

noted a number of significant cases in which you were involved. If applicable, would 

you please also describe at least five significant litigated matters in which you were 

involved during the past 10 years? 

Response. Five significant matters I have served as lead counsel or co-counsel in 

the past 10 years are: 

(a) HealthNet ads. Wachtel, a lengthy and complicated class action in Federal 

court in New Jersey, and at times in the third circuit, involving many issues 

related to the business practices of our client, a large HMO; 

(b) RobertPlan ads. New Jersey Insurance Commissioner, a complex series of 

matters involving contract and constitutional issues between our client, an automobile insurer, and New Jersey regulators, at times in state, trial and appellate 

courts; 

(c) Verizon Wireless ads. Demmick, a class action pending in Federal court in 

New Jersey concerning billing disputes in the telecommunications business; 

(d) Ullman vs. ExpressScripts, a large breach of contract dispute, involving 

pharmacy benefit managers in the Federal district court in New Jersey; 

(e) Phelps Dodge ads. Reichhold, lengthy litigation involving contribution 

issues under Federal environmental laws in the district of New Jersey. 

Each of these cases required me to learn or concentrate on particular aspects of 

substantive law and differing factual settings. The common thread throughout was 

the intense participation by the clients, and the requirement of my personal involvement and responsibility on a regular basis. 

Question 5. In response to question 13 of the Committee’s Supplemental Questionnaire, you indicated that, as Chairman of the Reserve Forces Policy Board from 

2009 to 2011, your goal was to ‘‘change the way in which health of the command 

was addressed’’ and that you had ‘‘urged radical changes in the way wounded/injured soldiers were treated.’’ 

A. Would you please share with the Committee what you perceived as the drawbacks of the then-current system and your ideas for change? 

Response. Based upon my personal experience representing individual soldiers, as 

well as the knowledge I gained from presentations made to the RFPB by medical 


1212GreArtNJ8.eps
20 

professionals, I believe the following were drawbacks of the then-current system, 

and I suggested the following changes: 

(1) the physical disability boards, as such, should be abolished and the percentage basis for compensating a soldier as medically unfit should also be abolished. I believe the medically unfit soldier should received 100% compensation. 

The soldier was either fit or unfit to remain in the military; 

(2) I believe a greater effort should have been made to retain soldiers in uniform, notwithstanding physical or psychological issues. Changes in military occupation specialty or even changes in branches of the service, or transfers to 

other armed services, is preferable to discharge, for those who wish to stay; 

(3) Lawyers should be provided at the earliest stages of the military medical 

evaluation process and carried through the administrative agency and court 

systems; 

(4) The warrior transition units should be abolished completely, and the individual soldier should be under the direct command of the military hospital or 

the responsibility of his reserve unit commander; 

(5) Provision should be made for reserve unit commanders to receive pay, allowances, and travel to superintend the care and treatment of members of their 

command; 

(6) The determination of percentage disabilities, if they are to be retained, 

should never be reduced, but only increased if the soldier makes a case for a 

change in circumstances. 

B. Under your leadership, what effect did the Reserve Forces Policy Board have 

on those issues? 

Response. I believe the recommendations we made in our annual reports for 2010 

and 2011, reports required by Congress, had a direct bearing on the way in which 

the physical evaluation board process has been administered by the military. Lawyers are involved earlier. Important psychological issues such as TBI and PTSD are 

now more easily dealt with by the soldier. Specifically, the practice of giving only 

one percentage rating per part of the body has been abolished. 

Question 6. The 2010 Annual Report of the Reserve Forces Policy Board contains 

the following information about a November 2009 meeting of that Board: 

Hon. W. Scott Gould, Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs, was particularly knowledgeable and forceful in his formal presentation to the Board. 

Of particular interest and enlightenment for Secretary Gould and the Board 

members were the exchanges which took place among Board members, the 

Deputy Secretary and his staff, and other well-informed officials of the Department who attended the public session of this meeting. 

These exchanges led to the continuation of a very detailed dialog among 

Chairman Greenberg, former Chairman O’Connell, Deputy Secretary Gould 

and Secretary of Veterans Affairs, the Honorable Eric K. Shinseki. This led 

to a further exchange of memoranda on the subject of the status of deployed 

reservists, and ultimately to a decision to elevate the consideration of these 

issues to the Deputy Secretary level in each department. This led to the 

pilot DES program, endorsed elsewhere in this report. 

A. Would you please describe the role of the Board in evaluating and recommending improvements with regard to the Disability Evaluation System? 

Response. The most important improvement recommended by the RFPB, was the 

elevation to the highest levels of DOD and VA of the DES. 

B. Would you please clarify what role the Reserve Forces Policy Board played in 

the creation of the Disability Evaluation System pilot? 

Response. The DES pilot program was the work product of the high level agreements between DOD and VA. The RFPB was very careful to strongly recommend 

that the DES pilot be scrutinized and regularly and carefully monitored. 

[The Committee questionnaire for Presidential nominees follows:] 

21 


NomGreenQ1.eps
22 


NomGreenQ2.eps
23 


NomGreenQ3.eps
24 


NomGreenQ4.eps
25 


NomGreenQ5.eps
26 


NomGreenQ6.eps
27 


NomGreenQ7.eps
28 


NomGreenQ8.eps
29 


NomGreenQ9.eps
30 

[Supplemental information to Presidential questionnaire:] 


NomGrSup1.eps

UNITED STATES SENATE 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS 

SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR NOMINEES 

TO THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS 

PUBLIC 

1. Bar Associations: List all bar associations or legal or judicial-related committees, 

selection panels, or conferences of which you are or have been a member, and provide 

the titles and dates of any offices which you have held in such groups. 

Association of Trial Lawyers of America, Committee Chairman, National Lecturer 

(approximately 1979-1989); 

Association of Trial Lawyers America, New Jersey, President (1986-1987) and other 

offices (1979-1989); 

American Bar Association, National Executive Council of the Young Lawyers Division 

(1973-1976); 

National Committees in the ABA Section of Litigation (approximately 1973-1979); 

New Jersey State Bar Association, Trustee (1973-1974); 

New Jersey State Bar Foundation, Trustee (approximately 1993); 

New Jersey State Bar Association, Chairman of the Judicial and Prosecutorial 

Appointments Committee (2011-2012); 

Founder and Chairman of Military Legal Assistance Program, NJSBA (2007-present); 

Co-Founder and Co-Chairman of New Jersey Military Law Institute, NJSBA (2002-

present); 

Member, New Jersey Supreme Court Committee on Admission of Foreign Attorneys 

(approximately 1973-1974); 

Member, New Jersey Supreme Court Civil Practice Committee (approximately 2007-

present); 

Lecturer at New Jersey Institute of Continuing Legal Education (approximately 1969-

2009); 

New York City Bar Association, Committee on Military Law and Justice (2012-present) ; 

Mercer County and Essex County and New Jersey State Bar Association (approximately 

1967 -present); 

District of Columbia Bar Association (approximately 1972-present) ; 

New York State Bar Association (approximately 1984-present); 

Hudson County, New Jersey Bar Association (approximately 1968-1970). 

2. Bar and Court Admission: 

a. Are you currently a member in good standing of the bar ofa Federal court or of 

the highest court of a state? 

Yes. 
31 


NomGrSup2.eps

b. List the date(s) you were admitted to the bar of any state and any lapses in 

membership. Please explain the reason for any lapse in membership. 

New Jersey 1967; New York 1984; District of Columbia 1972. 

c. List all courts in which you have been admitted to practice, including dates of 

admission and any lapses in membership. Please explain the reason for any lapse 

in membership. Provide the same information for administrative bodies that 

require special admission to practice. 

New Jersey, United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, 1967; 

United States Courts of Appeal for the Third and Fourth Circuits, approximately 

1975; New York, 1984; United States District Court for the Southern District of 

New York, approximately 1997; District of Columbia, 1972; Supreme Court of 

the United States, approximately 1974; United States Court of Federal Claims, 

approximately 1974; United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 

approximately 2009; United States Department of Veterans Affairs, 

approximately 2010; Nevada (pro hac vice), approximately 1997. 

3. Memberships: 

a. List all professional, business, fraternal, scholarly, civic, charitable, or other 

organizations, other than those listed in response to Question 12 on the 

Committee's initial questionnaire, to which you belong, or to which you have 

belonged, since graduation from law school. Provide dates of membership or 

participation, and indicate any office you held. Include clubs, working groups, 

advisory or editorial boards, panels, committees, or conferences. 

Friends of the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey 

(approximately 2001-present); 

Council of Friends of the Princeton University Library (approximately 2010-

present; 

Member ofthe Board, New Jersey Chapter, American Jewish Committee 

(approximately 1975-1979); 

Springdale Golf Club (approximately 1998-present); 

Nassau Club (approximately 1972-1974); 

Army and Navy Club (approximately 1990-present); 

Lotos Club (approximately 2011-present); 

Grolier Club (approximately 2011-present); 

Johns Hopkins Faculty Club (approximately 2004-present); 

Fellow, American Bar Foundation (approximately 1977-present); 

Life Member, Association ofthe United States Army (approximately 2001-

present); 

Life Member, Walter Reed Society (approximately 2008-present); 
32 


NomGrSup3.eps

Life Member, National Guard Association of the United States and New Jersey 

(approximately 1994-present); 

Life Member, United States Fencing Association (approximately 1999-present); 

Life Member, United States Army War College Alumni Association 

(approximately 1992-present). 

b. Indicate whether any of these organizations of which you are a member currently 

discriminate or formerly discriminated on the basis of race, sex, religion or 

national origin either through formal membership requirements or the practical 

implementation of membership policies. If so, describe what efforts, if any, you 

made to try to change the organization's discriminatory policies or practices. 

No. 

4. Published Writings and Public Statements: 

a. If you have published any written materials (letters to the editor, articles, reports, 

memoranda, policy statements, friend of the court briefs, testimony or other 

official statements or communications) relating in whole or in part to matters of 

public policy or legal interpretation related to veterans issues, please supply those 

materials to the Committee. 

2007: New Jersey Lawyer Magazine, Military Legal Assistance Programs for 

Soldiers and Veterans, New Jersey State Bar Association. 

b. Supply transcripts or recordings of all speeches or talks delivered by you, 

including commencement speeches, remarks, lectures, panel discussions, 

conferences, political speeches, and question-and-answer sessions that related in 

whole or in part to veterans issues. If you do not have a copy of the speech or a 

transcript or recording of your remarks, provide the name and address of the 

group before whom the speech was given, the date of the speech, and a summary 

of its subject matter. If you did not speak from a prepared text, furnish a copy of 

any outline or notes from which you spoke. 

(Note: As to any materials requested in this question, please omit any confidential 

materials or materials protected by the attorney-client privilege.) 

From 1967-2012, I have given approximately twenty-five to fifty speeches or lectures 

at various military schools or conferences and legal or professional conferences on 

various topics including litigation and related matters. 

Through a review of my personal files I have been able to identify some of the more 

recent speeches, lectures and presentations I have given related to veteran's issues. I 

have not retained any of the notes for these appearances. 
33 


NomGrSup4.eps

Presentations to New Jersey Military Law Institute of the New Jersey State Bar 

Association, 2002 through 2011 ; 

Acceptance Speech, Johns Hopkins Distinguished Alumnus Award, 2010; 

Acceptance Speech, New Jersey State Bar Medal of Honor Ceremony, June 2009; 

Acceptance of New Jersey Lawyer of the Year by New Jersey Law Journal, 

December 2009; 

Comments to Newark Star Ledger and Philadelphia Inquirer on appointment as 

Chairman, Reserve Forces Policy Board, Office of the Secretary of Defense, 

August 2009; 

Acceptance Speech, Rutgers Public Service Award, October 2010; 

Acceptance of Heroes Award, Community Hope Benefit, October 2011; 

Speech to Friends of the Institute of Advance Study on the Future of the all 

Volunteer Force, January 2011; 

Speech at United States District Court Ceremony in Memory of9/11, Camden, 

New Jersey, September 2011; 

Presentation of Citizen Patriot Award to Senator Robert Dole, Washington, March 

2011; 

Presentation of Citizen Patriot Award to former Chairman Terrence O'Connell, 

March 2010; 

Presentation of Citizen Patriot Award to Senator John McCain, Spring 2011; 

Presentation of remarks and comments at meetings ofthe Reserve Forces Policy 

Board, Office ofthe Secretary of Defense, November 2009 through August 2011; 

Presentations to the United States Army War College, Security Course, 

Washington, Spring 2010 and 2011 ; 

Remarks to Reserve Component Officers During Official Briefing at United 

States Military Installation, Vicenza, Italy 2010; 

Acceptance remarks 01-00 Fund, 2012 Leadership in Military and Veteran 

Justice Award, Newark, NJ (November 8, 2012). 
34 


NomGrSup5.eps

5. Legal Career: Answer each part separately. 

a. Describe chronologically your law practice and legal experience after graduation 

from law school including: 

1. whether you served as clerk to a judge and, if so, the name of the judge, 

the court, and the dates of the period you were a clerk; 

Law Secretary to the Honorable Robert A. Matthews, Judge of the Superior 

Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, December 1967-September 1968 

ii. whether you practiced alone and, if so, the addresses and dates; 

None. 

111. the dates, names, and addresses of law firms or offices, companies, or 

governmental agencies with which you have been affiliated, and the nature 

of your affiliation with each; 

McCarter & English, Newark, NJ, Associate, 1968; 

State of New Jersey, Special Counsel to Chancellor of Higher Education 

and Assistant Counsel to the Governor of New Jersey, 1968-1970; 

McCarter & English, Associate, 1970; 

Stems & Greenberg, Partner, 1970-1976; 

Greenberg & Prior, 1970-1989, Trenton and Princeton, FounderlPartner; 

Sills Cummis, Partner, 1989-1993, Princeton, Newark; 

McCarter & English, Partner, 1993-2012 Newark and New York; 

Borough of Princeton, Prosecutor 1987-1990; 

Commissioner, New Jersey State Commission ofInvestigation 1982-1987; 

Thomson West and predecessors, Author 1989-2012; 

Seton Hall Law School, Newark, Adjunct Professor of Military Law, 

2008-2012. 
35 


NomGrSup6.eps

iv. whether you served as a mediator or arbitrator in alternative dispute 

resolution proceedings and, if so, a description of the ten most significant 

matters with which you were involved in that capacity. 

None. 

b. Describe: 

i. the general character of your law practice and indicate by date when its 

character has changed over the years; 

The general character of my law practice has always been litigation. 

11. your typical clients and the areas at each period of your legal career, if 

any, in which you have specialized; 

For the first ten years of my legal career, my clients were largely teacher, 

professor, and public employee organizations and individuals. During the 

next three and one -half decades, my clients have been corporations of all 

sizes. For the past 5 years, much of my legal time has been spent on the 

pro bono representation, directly or indirectly, of soldiers and veterans. 

iii. any law practice or legal experience that involved veterans' law. 

Apart from my representation of individual soldiers, in the military 

evaluation board/physical evaluation board process, I have directed our 

law firm program on military and veteran representation, and have taught 

an important portion of my military law course on veterans' issues. 

c. Describe the percentage of your practice that has been in litigation and whether 

you appeared in court frequently, occasionally, or not at all. If the frequency of 

your appearances in court varied, describe such variance, providing dates. 

During the first two decades of my practice, I appeared in Court or before State or 

Federal Administrative agencies extremely frequently. During the past two and 

one-half decades, I have appeared in Court frequently, although far more of my 

professional time has been spent in organizing and directing litigation. I have 

been a Certified Civil Trial Attorney by the New Jersey Supreme Court since 

1983, requiring re-certification every seven/five years, and requiring 

demonstration of substantial litigation experience. Attached is a list of 

representative published opinions beginning with 1969 and ending in 2009. 

1. Indicate the percentage of your practice in: 

1. federal courts; 40% 

2. state courts of record; 40% 

3. other courts; 5% 
36 


NomGrSup7.eps

4. administrative agencies. 15% 

n. Indicate the percentage of your practice in: 

1. civil proceedings; 100% 

2. criminal proceedings. 0% 

d. State the number of cases in courts of record, including cases before 

administrative law judges, you tried to verdict, judgment or final decision (rather 

than settled), indicating whether you were sole counsel, chief counsel, or associate 

counsel. 

Approximately 350 cases in which I was sole counselor chief counsel; and 

approximately 50 cases in which I was associate counsel. 

e. Describe your practice, if any, before the Supreme Court of the United States. 

Supply any briefs, amicus or otherwise, and, if applicable, any oral argument 

transcripts before the Supreme Court in connection with your practice. 

None 

6. Litigation: Describe the ten most significant litigated matters that you personally 

handled, whether or not you were the attorney of record. Provide the citations, if the 

cases were reported, and the docket number and date if unreported. Provide a summary 

of the substance of each case. Identify the party or parties whom you represented and 

describe in detail the nature of your participation in the litigation and the final disposition 

of the case. Also state as to each case: 

a. the date of representation; 

b. the name of the court and the name of the judge or judges before whom the case 

was litigated; and 

c. the individual name, addresses, and telephone numbers of co-counsel and of 

principal counsel for each of the other parties. 

1. Passaic County Bar Ass'n v. Hughes, 108 NJ Super 161, 260 A2d 261 (1969) 

I represented the Governor of New Jersey in a dispute over Senatorial courtesy with 

regard to judges. Our position prevailed at the trial level and in the Supreme Court of 

New Jersey. Certiorari was denied by the Supreme Court of the United States. The 

Governor nominatedfivejudges, the State Senator from Passaic County invoked 

senatorial courtesy. The County Bar brought suit alleging that because of the lack of civil 

judges, clients could not get their day in court and were thus being denied an important 

property right. The State senate asserted its custom as a separate branch of government. 

The Bar Association contended that the Governor was obligated to withdraw the 

nominations and put forward judges who could be corifirmed. Our position was that once 

we had made the nominations, our Constitutional role had been folfilled. The Courts 

agreed. 
37 


NomGrSup8.eps

2. Endress v. Brookdale Community College. 144 NJ. Super 109, 364 A2d 1080 (1976) 

My client was a college journalism professor who had been denied tenure. She was the 

advisor to the student newspaper and author of an editorial condemning the college 

Board of Trustees for the manner in which a no bid contract had been awarded. Her 

First Amendment rights to freedom of the press were at issue. I tried the case, without a 

jury. The trial judge awarded damages, attorneys' fees and ordered her reinstatement, 

thus conferring tenure as a matter of law. Because it was a matter of freedom of the 

press, involving among other things, the battle of experts as to the role of a college 

newspaper faculty advisor, the outcome was front page news in The New York Times, The 

Wall Street Journal, and wire services around the country. We also prevailed on appeal. 

3. American Ass'n of University Professors. Bloomfield College Chapter v. Bloomfield 

College, 129 NJ Super 249, 322 A2d 846 (1974) 

I represented the faculty of this small Presbyterian college which found itself in financial 

difficulty. The college had accepted the 1940 Statement of Academic Freedom and 

Tenure of the American Association of University Professors, which dealt specifically 

with financial exigencies. The College fired the entire faculty and made them at-will 

employees. We contended the acceptance of the 1940 Statement was a binding contract, 

breached by the college. 1 tried the case without a jury. The Judge agreed, as did the 

Appellate Courts. This was a case offirst impression testing the status of the 1940 

Statement as an enforceable contract. 

4. Nolan v. Otis Elevator Co., 102 NJ 30 (1986) 

My clients were employees of a manufacturer closing its New Jersey plant. The issue was 

age discrimination under New Jersey law. The lower courts agreed with our contention 

on the merits, but the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that as to age discrimination 

claims, federal law pre-empted State law. I took this case without fee; the Attorney 

General of New Jersey intervened as a party on our side. The original attorneys had 

missed the federal statute of limitations, which made the emphasis on State law more 

compelling. 

5. State of N.Y. v. U.S. Metals Refining Co., 771 F.2d 796 (3 Cir 1985) 

I represented an important secondary copper smelting plant, which was an important 

employer and defense industry in industrial New Jersey. After much hard fought 

litigation in various federal courts, of which this issue is a good example, the matter was 

ultimately settled on terms extremely favorable to my client. The continued employment 

of hundreds of industrial workers was thus guaranteed. 

6. United Jersey Banks v. Parell, 783 F2d 360 (3 Cir 1986) 

My clients were a group of relatively smaller banks. They alleged that New Jersey's 

largest bank had exceeded a state law limit of growth by acquisition, rather than by 

internal growth. The defendant claimed that State law was pre-empted. The Court 

disagreed. We prevailed on this important issue of the power of State banking regulators. 

7. White Birch Realty Corp. v. Gloucester Tp. Municipal Utilities Authority. 80 NJ 165 

(1979) 
38 


NomGrSup9.eps

After a lengthy trial, the Court agreed with our position that real estate developers 

should not be made to bear an unreasonable burden of infrastructure costs as the price of 

municipal approvals. The Supreme Court of New Jersey agreed. 

8. Matter of Association of Trial Lawyers of America, 228 N.J. Super. 180 

As a former president of the state trial lawyers association, I was asked to challenge the 

statute as violation of State and Federal constitutional law. The principle was important, 

as were the merits of the case. The Appellate Court believed standing was more 

important. 

9. New Jersey Ed. Ass'n v. Burke, 579 F2d 764 (3 Cir. 1978) 

I represented the largest public school teacher association which challenged New 

Jersey's rules concerning bilingual education. The federal court of appeals held that we 

were entitled to test the facts and the law relating to the fondamental fairness of these 

regulations in the trial court. After a lengthy trial, my client ultimately prevailed on the 

most important aspect of the challenge. 

10. Pitt v. Pine Valley Golf Club, 695 FSupp 778 (DNJ 1988) 

My client was denied membership in a private country club, often referred to as the finest 

golf club in the United States. I challenged the status of the country club as a sham in 

that it was identical with the Borough of Pine Valley. My pro bono representation based 

upon the belief that a private club could not use the benefits of municipal status to 

exclude non-members, as a matter of constitutional moment, was rejected on a highly 

technical jurisdictional issue. 

Each of these cases provides a sample from a long and broad practice over 45 years. I 

was the attorney, solely responsible for the strategy and presentation at trial, and on 

appeal of each of these matters. I may have had the assistance of other counsel, but these 

cases, as well as the other representative matters submitted herewith, were ultimately my 

responsibility. 

Attached are copies of these opinions, as well as a list of other representative matters 

together with their citations. 

7. Judicial Opinions/Offices: 

a. If you are or have ever been a judge, attach a statement providing (1) citations for 

the ten most significant opinions you have written, (2) a short summary of and 

citations for all appellate opinions either reversing your decision or confirming it 

with significant criticism of your substantive or procedural rulings, and (3) 

citations for significant opinions on federal or state constitutional issues, together 

with citations for any appellate court rulings on your decisions in those cases. (If 

any of the opinions were not officially reported, please provide a copy of the 

opinions.) 

Not applicable. 
39 


NomGrSup10.eps

b. State (chronologically) any judicial office you have held and whether you were 

elected or appointed. Please provide a description of the jurisdiction of each such 

court. 

Not applicable. 

8. Legal Activities: Describe the most significant legal activities you have pursued, 

including significant litigation which did not progress to trial or legal matters that did not 

involve litigation. Describe fully the nature of your participation in these activities. 

(Note: As to any facts requested in this question, please omit any information protected 

by the attorney-client privilege.) 

After a long career in litigation, the following are a representative sample of cases in which I was 

counsel, but did not result in published opinions: 

1. I was co-counsel with Joe Jamail and Harry Reasoner of Houston, Texas in a patent 

litigation in Nevada involving the ownership of the patent to the Bar Code Reader. 

William Magrath of Reno was also co-counsel in the case. We represented United 

States Metals which employed in the early 1950s the alleged patent holder. He had 

executed a fully enforceable assignment agreement with our client. He was notorious 

for claiming patent infringement, having made a fortune in litigating his claims. 

Although the matter was ultimately dismissed in State Court in Nevada on a laches 

argument, it was one of the most enjoyable and instructive collaborations of my 

professional career. 

2. In representing Wheaton Industries, then one of New Jersey's largest private 

employers, I established principle that State regulatory officials must be properly 

trained before enforcing State Environmental Regulations. The State Court Judge, 

while correctly deciding in our favor, was courageous in his ultimate decision. This 

occurred early in my career and was important in reinforcing my instinctive belief in 

an independent judiciary. 

3. As Law Secretary to Judge Robert Matthews, who sat in a particularly busy trial court 

across the Hudson River from New York City, I gained enormous experience in a 

variety of litigated matters, including one in which the Judge ruled in favor of a case 

brought by Gloria Steinem challenging the prohibition of women standing at a bar in 

Bayonne taverns. 

4. I represented Chanel in Federal Court. The issue was New Jersey's franchise 

protection statute. After removing the case to Federal Court, itself a significant 

victory, the matter was ultimately resolved by mediation. 

5. I represented the Township of Gloucester in a landfill dispute, litigated for nearly a 

decade and involving dozens of appearances before a Magistrate Judge who now 
40 


NomGrSup11.eps

serves as the Chief Judge of the Federal Court in New Jersey. While many of his 

decisions in this matter were published, his preparation, moderation, and patience 

were necessary in reaching an extremely complicated settlement. 

6. Before the untimely death of my client, a self-made, highly successful businessman, I 

was prepared to try this case of David (my client) against Goliath before a federal 

judge in New Jersey. Her thoughtful and imaginative rulings resulted in a highly 

favorable settlement in late 2011. 

9. Lobbying Activities: List any client(s) or organization(s) for whom you performed 

lobbying activities and describe the lobbying activities you performed on behalf of such 

client(s) or organizations(s). 

(Note: As to any facts requested in this question, please omit any information protected 

by the attorney-client privilege.) 

None. 

10. Teaching: What, if any, courses have you taught? For each course, state the title, the 

institution at which you taught the course, the years in which you taught the course, and 

describe briefly the subject matter of the course and the major topics taught. If you have 

a syllabus of each course, provide copies to the committee. 

Since 2008 I have taught the fIrst military law course offered by Seton Hall University 

School of Law. It is a broad course in military justice, veteran's benefIts, and other 

statutory and constitutional considerations applicable to the armed forces. In 2008, I had 

9 students. In 2012, I will have approximately 38 students. Each year the enrollment has 

increased. A copy of the current syllabus, substantially consistent with previous years, is 

supplied. 

11. Outside Commitments During Service: Do you have any plans, commitments, or 

agreements to pursue outside employment, with or without compensation, during your 

service? If so, explain. 

No. 

12. Principal Office ofthe U.S. Court of Appeals: By statute, the principal offIce of the 

U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims is in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area. 

If confIrmed, would you maintain your permanent residence within commuting distance 

of the Court while in active service? 

Yes. 

13. Charitable or Volunteer Work: Please describe any charitable or volunteer work, 

including pro bono work, you have performed, particularly any work involving military 

personnel, veterans, or their families. 
41 


NomGrSup12.eps

During the past 5 years from approximately June 2007 through the present, I have devoted 

hundreds of hours in direct support of military personnel and veterans in their struggles with 

the military and veterans benefits systems. I created the New Jersey State Bar Association 

Military Legal Assistance Program, described in detail in the June 2007 edition of New 

Jersey Lawyer Magazine. During those past 5 years I have represented personally at medical 

evaluation/physical evaluation boards at Walter Reed, individual members of the Reserve 

Components, wounded in combat or otherwise injured as a result of deployment to Iraq or 

Afghanistan. I have personally directed the program at our law fIrm, and with the help of my 

partners and associates, we have represented nearly 100 individuals, and resolved each of 

their cases, either by hearing or by settlement. 

During my two years (2009-2011) as Chairman of the Reserve Forces Policy Board in the 

OffIce of the Secretary of Defense, I had as my primary personal goal, an effort to change the 

way in which the health of the command was addressed. At each formal meeting, and in each 

of the two annual reports for which I was primarily responsible, I urged radical changes in 

the way wounded/injured soldiers were treated. 

I have spoken often, received many awards for my efforts, and believe that there is much left 

to be done. In these last few years of my professional career, I have come to consider myself, 

more than any other attribute, a soldier's lawyer. 

I am happy to say that throughout my professional career I have had early and sustained 

fInancial success and together with my wife and children have supported many charitable 

institutions. We have established endowed scholarships and prizes at Johns Hopkins and 

Brown University, at The Lawrenceville School, and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer 

Center. I served both as a Commissioner and a benefactor of the New Jersey World War IT 

Memorial Commission, dedicated in Trenton in the fall of2008. We regularly contribute 

approximately 10 to 20% of our annual earned income to such causes as the Archdioceses of 

Newark, New York, and Washington for the benefIt of wounded soldiers, to the American 

Jewish Committee, the United Jewish Appeal and the Jewish Community Centers, as well as 

local charities. 

I served as a Board Member for several years, and contributed substantial resources to the 

Thanks to Scandinavia Charitable Trust, which gives scholarships to Scandinavian students 

in recognition of the saving of Jewish people during World War II. I have been a member 

since 1973 and now serve as Chairman of the Mary Sachs Charitable Trust, established by 

my great Aunt, at her death in 1960, for the benefIt of charitable and educational causes in 

Central Pennsylvania and elsewhere. 

In addition to serving in various public or civic minded activities in our home town, we are 

also regular and substantial supporters of the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton and 

the Princeton University Library and Art Museum. 
42 

[Letter from Judicial Conference of the United States:] 

Chairman MURRAY. Thank you very much, Mr. Greenberg. 

Mr. Kelly, we welcome your testimony. 

TESTIMONY OF KEITH C. KELLY, NOMINEE TO BE ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY OF THE VETERANS’ EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Mr. KELLY. Thank you, and good morning, Chairwoman Murray, 

Ranking Member Burr, and distinguished Members of the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today 

and for considering my nomination to serve as the Assistant Secretary for Veterans’ Employment and Training. Your commitment 

to our Nation’s veterans and the transitioning servicemembers and 

their families is truly inspiring. 

I would also like to personally thank Senator Jon Tester here for 

his gracious introduction and for his unwavering support and 

friendship over the many years. As many of you may know, SenVerDate Nov 24 2008 17:45 Mar 15, 2013 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 H:\ACTIVE\121212.TXT PAULIN

NomGreJCltr.eps
43 

ator Tester is committed to serving veterans and their families in 

Montana and the Nation and he is an outstanding advocate for our 

State, and for that, I thank you, Senator Tester. 

I am humbled and honored by President Obama’s nomination 

and the confidence of both he and Secretary Solis have shown in 

me. 

During the past few days, I have been privileged to meet with 

many of you and your staff and have received invaluable guidance 

and insights into the Committee’s priorities and concerns. If confirmed, I look forward to continuing this dialog and working with 

you. 

While they could not be here today, I would also like to thank 

my family for their love and support. We have a long history of 

service in our family. My wife, Norma Jean, was serving our country at the homefront (at home) by taking care of my young family 

while I fought in Vietnam. I am grateful to her and all of the other 

military families who also serve our country. Her father, Joe 

Walsh, served in the U.S. Merchant Marines during World War II. 

I would also like to thank my children, Keith, Shannon, Conan, 

and Kevin, who is no longer with us. My oldest son, Keith Joseph, 

has made a career as a servicemember with the Montana National 

Guard and has already served in Iraq. 

I would also like to acknowledge and thank Governor Brian 

Schweitzer for his service to the great State of Montana and to his 

support for me as Commissioner at the Montana Department of 

Labor and Industry. They have all played a part and a role in my 

being here today. 

During the Vietnam War, I served in the 101st Airborne Division 

as a sergeant in charge of an infantry squad and later full-sized 

platoon. We operated in the field with daily reconnaissance sweeps 

and nightly ambushes. It was through these activities that I honed 

my leadership skills and earned the Combat Infantryman Badge 

and the Bronze Star. 

When I returned home from service with the Army, my family 

and I, like most military families, faced the challenge of my transition from a military combat life to my role as a father and husband 

and part of an American workforce. At that time, there was very 

little transition support, and as a result, the experience was unnecessarily difficult. Today, thanks to the dedication of the people in 

this room and the dedication of so many who care about our servicemembers and their families, significantly more transition resources and support are now available. 

However, we can and we must do more. If confirmed, I pledge to 

do my level best to ensure that the men and women who serve our 

country have the best services and benefits our Nation has to offer. 

After I returned home from Vietnam and graduated with a Master’s degree in agriculture economics and economics, I began my 

35-year career dedicated to public service. I believe in bipartisanship. I have worked for and with Republicans and Democrats 

throughout my career and in State and Federal Governments. I 

have faced difficult issues, and, if confirmed, my experiences to 

overcome those challenges will improve my work at VETS. 

It is in my current position as Commissioner of the Montana Department of Labor and Industry I have become more engaged with 

44 

labor and veterans’ programs and have worked on many of these 

programs administered by the VETS. So my vision for every day 

is we are reminded with the tremendous sacrifices made by the 

members of the U.S. Armed Services, the National Guard and Reserve. Yet all too often, those who have given so much for America 

kind of face a difficult transition back to civilian life. 

If confirmed, I would strive to achieve the following goals. Number 1, improve our reach to servicemembers, veterans, and their 

families and other stakeholders. 

Number 2, sustain and bolster intensive employment service for 

those with significant barriers to employment. 

Three, fully implement and continuously improve the redesigned 

Transition Assistance Program. 

Four, continue to partner with other Federal agencies implementing the redesigned Employer Workshop. 

And last, five, increase and enhance VETS’ ability to measure 

and report on the impact of our programs. 

In conclusion, if confirmed, I will work closely with you, with the 

incredible VETS team, and with our partners and stakeholders to 

provide veterans and soon-to-be veterans and their families with 

the best possible resources there are. 

Thank you again for considering my nomination. It will be a 

privilege and honor to serve those who have served our Nation. I 

appreciate having this opportunity to testify before you today and 

am happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Kelly follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF KEITH KELLY, NOMINEE TO BE THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY

FOR VETERANS’ EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Good Morning Chairwoman Murray, Ranking Member Burr and distinguished 

Members of the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you 

today and for considering my nomination to serve as the Assistant Secretary for 

Veterans’ Employment and Training. Your commitment to our Nation’s veterans, 

transitioning servicemembers and their families is inspiring. 

I would also like to thank Senator Tester for his gracious introduction and for his 

unwavering support and friendship over the years. As many of you know, Senator 

Tester is committed to serving veterans and their families in Montana and the Nation. He has been an outstanding advocate for our state. Thank you, Senator. 

I am humbled and honored by President Barack Obama’s nomination and the confidence both he and Secretary Hilda Solis have shown in me. President Obama and 

Secretary Solis are committed to ensuring that the men and women who serve this 

country have the employment support, assistance and opportunities they need and 

deserve to successfully transition to the civilian workforce, and find and secure 

meaningful careers. If confirmed, it will be my honor and privilege to work with this 

Committee to achieve that goal. 

During the past few days, I have been privileged to meet with many of you and 

your staff and have received invaluable guidance and insight into the Committee’s 

priorities and concerns. If confirmed, I look forward to continuing this dialog on an 

ongoing basis. 

While they could not be here today, I would like to thank my family for their love 

and support. We have a long history of service in our family. My wife, Norma Jean, 

has been the backbone of our family. She cared for our family while I served with 

the 101st Airborne Division in Vietnam. I am grateful to her and all of the other 

military families that serve our country. Her father, Joe Walsh, served in the U.S. 

Merchant Marines during World War II. I would like to thank my children, Keith, 

Shannon, and Conan and Kevin (deceased). My oldest, Keith Joseph, has made a 

career as a servicemember with the Montana National Guard and has served in 

Iraq. I would also like to acknowledge and thank Governor Brian Schweitzer for his 

service to the great state of Montana and his support of me as Commissioner of the 

Montana Department of Labor and Industry. They have all played a major role in 

my being here today. 

45 

MILITARY SERVICE

During the Vietnam War, I served with the 101st Airborne Division as the Sergeant in charge of an infantry squad and later a platoon. We operated in the field 

with daily reconnaissance sweeps and nightly ambushes. We conducted combat assaults both in the jungle and on fire-support bases. It was through these activities 

that I honed my leadership abilities and earned my Combat Infantryman Badge and 

Bronze Star. 

When I returned home from my service with the Army, my family and I, like most 

military families, faced the challenge of my transition from a military combat life 

to my role as father, husband, and part of the American workforce. This period was 

the most difficult time in our young marriage, for our family and for my professional 

career. At that time, there was very little support or assistance for transitioning servicemembers or their families. As a result, the transition was unnecessarily difficult 

and we had to navigate these challenges largely by ourselves. 

Today, thanks to the dedication of the people in this room and many others in 

Congress and throughout the Federal Government, significantly more resources are 

available to support service men and women with this transition. However, we can 

and must do more. President Obama and Secretary Solis are committed to serving 

our servicemen and their families as well as they’ve served us by providing them 

with the support they need and deserve to successfully transition to the civilian 

workforce and find and secure meaningful careers. If confirmed, I pledge to do my 

best to ensure that the 1.5 million servicemembers expected to transition out of the 

military over the next five years, are not alone. I will work every day to fulfill the 

promises of the President and the Secretary to provide them with the best services 

and benefits our Nation has to offer. 

PUBLIC SERVICE

After returning home from Vietnam, I used my GI benefits to attend Montana 

State University and graduated with masters’ degrees in Agricultural Economics 

and Economics. I then returned to public service and have dedicated the past thirtyfive years of my professional career to this endeavor. I believe in bipartisanship and 

have worked for and with Republicans and Democrats throughout my career. I 

served as the Director of the Montana Department of Agriculture for six years 

under a democratic Governor and spent seven years as the Director of the Arizona 

Department of Agriculture under a republican Governor. Then, as now, state and 

Federal Governments faced difficult issues and, if confirmed, my experiences overcoming those obstacles will inform my work at VETS. For instance, in 1994 we faced 

significant revenue shortfalls. My agency experienced a 20% reduction in our budget. However, I succeeded in making difficult decisions and meeting the reduction 

goals and was singled out by the State Department of Administration for my excellent management abilities. 

It is in my current position as Commissioner of the Montana Department of Labor 

and Industry, that I have become more engaged with labor and veterans’ programs. 

As chair of the Veterans’ Affairs Committee of NASWA (National Association of 

Workforce Agencies) from 2008–2010, I interacted with and worked on many of the 

programs administered by VETS. During my tenure, the Committee evaluated these 

programs and submitted recommendations to the NASWA Board to improve the employment and training services for America’s Veterans. 

VISION FOR VETS

Every day, we are reminded of the tremendous sacrifices made by the members 

of the U.S. Armed Services, National Guard and Reserve. They leave their friends, 

families and careers behind to defend our freedoms around the world. These brave 

men and women deserve a hero’s welcome and a chance to utilize their unique skills 

to help rebuild our economy when they return home. Yet, all too often, those who 

have given so much for America face a difficult transition back to civilian life and 

struggle to find a job worthy of their talents. President Obama and Secretary Solis 

have made a commitment to provide the men and women who serve this country 

and their families with the employment support, assistance and opportunities they 

need and deserve to find and secure meaningful careers. If confirmed, I would work 

with this Committee, Congress, my fellow agencies at the Department of Labor and 

within the Administration as a whole to fulfill this commitment. 

In particular, I would strive to achieve the following goals: 

(1) Improve outreach to servicemembers, veterans and stakeholders to ensure 

they are aware of and have access to the programs and services available to 

help them achieve their employment and career goals; 

46 

(2) Sustain and bolster intensive employment services to those with significant barriers to employment; 

(3) Fully implement and continuously improve the redesigned DOL Transition 

Assistance Program (TAP), continue to partner with the Departments of Veterans Affairs, Defense, Homeland Security and others to by implementing the 

redesigned DOL Employment Workshop as part of comprehensive effort to 

seamlessly transition servicemembers, Guard and Reserve members and their 

families from active duty to civilian life; and 

(4) Increase and enhance VETS ability to measure and report on the impact 

of our programs by improving data collection and reporting. 

In conclusion, if confirmed, I will work closely with you, with the incredible VETS 

team and with our partners and stakeholders to provide veterans, transitioning servicemembers and their families with the best possible resources and services to enable their success in today’s economy. Thank you for your unwavering commitment 

to veterans and for considering my nomination. It would be a privilege and an honor 

to serve our Nation’s veterans, transitioning servicemembers and their families. 

I appreciate having the opportunity to testify before you today and am happy to 

answer any questions you may have. 

RESPONSE TO PREHEARING QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. PATTY MURRAY TO KEITH

C. KELLY TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR VETERANS’ EMPLOYMENT AND TRAIN- ING, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Question 1. Have you and Secretary Solis discussed the duties and the role you 

would assume as Assistant Secretary for Veterans’ Employment and Training if you 

are confirmed? If so, what specific areas of the job were discussed? 

Response. Yes. In our conversations, she has made it abundantly clear that veterans and VETS are a high priority for her. Specifically, we discussed: 

• enhancing coordination within the Department on those programs that support 

the training and hiring of veterans; 

• improving coordination with other Federal agencies that have programs to support veterans, including but not limited to the Department of Veterans’ Affairs and 

the Department of Defense; 

• developing programs that can more successfully reach homeless veterans; 

• increasing outreach young veterans through via various social media; and 

• including all immediate family members in the transition process for the transitioning servicemember. 

Question 2. Have you and Secretary Shinseki discussed the relationship you would 

have with the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in your capacity as an Assistant 

Secretary within the Department of Labor (DOL)? 

Response. I have not yet had the opportunity to meet with Secretary Shinseki, 

but it will be one of my top priorities if I am confirmed. 

Question 3. What policymaking role do you anticipate having if you are confirmed? 

Response. If confirmed, my role will be to support the Secretary’s policymaking 

responsibilities by serving as her principal advisor and partner on issues relating 

to Veterans’ employment and training. 

Question 4. If confirmed, what would you most like to accomplish in your new position? What would you hope your legacy to the Department would be? 

Response. My goal is to ensure that the transition for the military personnel to 

civilian life is less burdensome and more rewarding for veterans and their families. 

In particular, I would strive to achieve the following goals: 

• Improve outreach to servicemembers, veterans and their families to ensure they 

are aware of and have access to the programs and services available to help them 

achieve their employment and career goals; 

• Focus on providing intensive employment services to those with significant barriers to employment; 

• Improve the Transition Assistance Program (TAP), in collaboration with the Departments of Veterans Affairs, Defense, Homeland Security and others to by implementing the redesigned DOL Employment Workshop as part of comprehensive effort 

to seamlessly transition Servicemembers, Guard and Reserve members and their 

families from active duty to civilian life; and 

• Increase and enhance VETS ability to measure and report on the impact of our 

programs by improving data collection and reporting. 

Question 5. How would you describe your management style and how is it suited 

to this particular position? 

47 

Response. Throughout my career, I have always worked to communicate the agency’s goals in the broader sense and empower staff to implement the policies and programs within a defined timeframe. I work to develop working relationships built on 

trust and mutual respect. I am viewed as a ‘bottom up’ administrator that seeks 

and receives a variety of input from staff and stakeholders and ultimately make a 

decision that has been thoroughly vetted and has ‘buy in’ from all interested parties. 

Question 6. What in your experience do you believe contributes to your qualifications for this new position? 

Response. As a veteran myself, I have experienced firsthand the challenges of returning from a combat environment and transitioning into a civilian environment. 

I have a career in public that spans three decades and includes leading, under both 

republican and democratic Governors, three state agencies in two states. These 

agencies have ranged in scope, both in terms of size and budget, as well as in mission. As head of the Farm Service Agency at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

I led an agency of 13,000 full-time employees with a budget of $1.1 billion and today 

as Commissioner of the Montana Department of Labor I oversee an agency with a 

budget of nearly $60 million and 750 full-time employees. 

Question 7. I believe much can be done to improve the coordination and cooperation between VA and DOL? What thoughts do you have as to how this might be 

achieved? 

Response. I would agree completely. I look forward to partnering with you, other 

Members of Congress, and staff at the VA to maximize our ability to serve veterans. 

Question 8. Are there any specific problems or challenges that you have already 

identified that you would like to tackle in this new position? 

Response. Since the intent to nominate, my involvement with DOL has been minimal. Consequently, my first priority will be to learn more about the agency, observe 

operations in the field, assess the current impact of its programs, and solicit input 

from VETS’ team members, veterans and stakeholder groups. 

Question 9. How do you believe special hiring authorities—for example, veterans’ 

preference, might be promoted to increase the employment of veterans across all 

Federal agencies? 

Response. VETS’ responsibilities in this area complement OPM’s responsibility of 

developing and managing human capital for the Federal Government. VETS should 

continue to work in partnership with OPM to increase awareness, understanding 

and support of these authorities within all Federal agencies, with particular outreach to human resources and management decisionmakers. VETS should also enhance the synchronization of our efforts with stakeholders such as the VSOs, state 

workforce agencies, VA’s Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Service, and 

other government entities at the Federal and state levels. 

Question 10. How do you plan to use your role to enhance employment opportunities for homeless veterans? 

Response. If confirmed, I am committed to supporting President Barack Obama’s 

promise to combat homelessness among our Nation’s veterans by expanding proven 

programs and launching innovative services. 

Effectively addressing Veterans’ homelessness will require working in partnership 

with VA, HUD, HHS and other Federal agencies. While employment is a key component of freedom from homelessness, the problem needs to be addressed in a holistic, 

interagency manner with other important stakeholders—government and nongovernmental—at the national, state and local level, such as community-based organizations and neighborhood partnerships. 

Question 11. Too often, servicemembers leave the military unaware of the benefits 

and services they have earned. It is important to ensure transitioning veterans are 

aware of the resources available to them. What role should VETS have in this process? 

Response. If confirmed, I have identified several goals that I would like to accomplish in my capacity as Assistant Secretary for VETS. The first of those goals is to 

improve outreach to servicemembers, veterans and their families to ensure they are 

aware of and have access to the programs and services available to help them 

achieve their employment and career goals. I will exhaust all means to ensure that 

transitioning services are educated on the many opportunities, programs, and resources available to them. 

Question 12. The unemployment rate among young post-9/11 era veterans has 

been consistently higher than their civilian counterparts. If confirmed, you will oversee several programs that serve this population. What improvements should be 

made to such programs to better assist these individuals? 

48 

Response. If confirmed, I will ensure that VETS is doing all it can to increase outreach young veterans. I will engage a variety of stakeholders to determine the most 

effective way to reach this population and provide them with tools that allow them 

to reintegrate into the workplace. 

Question 13. The way in which job-seekers search for employment opportunities 

has changed. Many individuals search online job banks for possible employment. 

What emphasis will you place on assisting veterans in finding employment by using 

online tools? 

Response. Particularly for those younger veterans, if confirmed, I would place a 

high emphasis on the technology they are comfortable with and utilize regularly. 

Sites such as Facebook and LinkedIn offer many opportunities for veterans to navigate the business world and job opportunities that are available. The challenge has 

always been and will continue to be ensuring the process is intuitive and user 

friendly. 

Question 14. Do you agree to appear before the Committee at such times and concerning such matters as the Committee might request for so long as you serve in 

the position for which you now seek confirmation? 

Response. Yes. I look forward to working collaboratively with Congress. 

RESPONSE TO PREHEARING QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. RICHARD BURR TO KEITH

C. KELLY TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR VETERANS’ EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Question 1. The completed questionnaire you submitted to the Senate Committee 

on Veterans’ Affairs reflects that you were president of Kelly & Associates from 

2001 to 2002. 

A. Please identify the jurisdiction(s) where this entity was licensed to do business 

and the current status of this entity. If it is no longer in existence, please explain 

how and when it was dissolved. 

Response. Kelly & Associates was registered in the Commonwealth of Virginia. 

The business was closed in 2002 when I moved back to Montana to accept a position 

with the State of Montana. 

B. What was the nature of that business entity? 

Response. Government Relations 

C. Please explain the general nature of the customers/clients served by that business. 

Response. Kelly & Associates’ primary client was an economic analysis firm that 

specialized in risk management including assessing probabilities for weather related 

crop losses in order to build sustainable actuarial tables for crop insurance. 

Question 2. Question 19(d) of the Committee’s questionnaire requests information 

on any activities you have engaged in during the last 10 years for the purpose of 

passing, defeating, or modifying any legislation or impacting the administration of 

laws or public policy. In response, you indicated: ‘‘NONE; NASWA does lobby on behalf of State Workforce Agencies.’’ 

A. Would you please clarify whether, as a member or officer of the National Association of State Workforce Agencies (NASWA), you personally engaged in any activities for the purpose of passing, defeating, or modifying any legislation or modifying 

the administration of laws or public policy? If so, please provide a description of 

those activities, including the legislation, laws, or policies you were seeking to 

change. 

Response. As a member of NASWA, I accompanied staff of NASWA to meetings 

with Members of Congress and/or their staff to discuss issues important to the publicly-funded workforce system, including unemployment insurance, reauthorization 

of the Workforce Innovation Act, and annual appropriations. 

B. Would you please clarify whether, as a state employee, you personally engaged 

in any activities for the purpose of modifying any legislation or laws? If so, please 

provide a description of those activities, including the legislation or laws you were 

seeking to change. 

Response. As Commissioner of the Montana Department of Labor &Industry, I 

testified on behalf of the Schweitzer Administration on both budgetary issues and 

policy considerations. During that time, there were successful efforts to pass comprehensive Workers Compensation reform; legislation to increase and index the 

minimum wage; and legislation that would allow Montana to operate as a single 

State Workforce Investment Board. Additionally, the Montana Department of Labor 

& Industry provided data and responded to questionnaires for NASWA which were 

49 

used to develop recommendations for implementation of various policies impacting 

the workforce system and unemployment programs. 

C. Question 16(b) of the Committee’s questionnaire requests information about 

any reports, memoranda, or policy statements you may have helped to prepare on 

behalf of any organization. In response, you indicated: ‘‘N/A.’’ Would you please clarify whether, as a member or officer of the National Association of State Workforce 

Agencies, you contributed to any reports or policy statements for that organization? 

If so, please provide a copy of any such materials. 

Response. As stated in my response to Question 2(B), while serving as Commissioner, the Montana Department of Labor & Industry provided data and responded 

to questionnaires for NASWA which were used to develop recommendations for implementation of various policies impacting the workforce system and unemployment 

programs,. All policy and budget recommendations were first recommended by the 

Executive Committee and then voted on by the full board, which included the heads 

of all 50 state agencies. Any documents or reports released by the organization were 

drafted by NASWA staff. 

D. According to information from NASWA, you previously served as the chair of 

the NASWA Veterans’ Affairs Committee. Would you please describe your responsibilities and activities in that role? 

Response. The role of NASWA’s Veterans’ Affairs Committee is to advise State 

Administrators on issues related to workforce programs for veterans, primarily the 

Disabled Veterans Outreach Program and the Local Veterans Employment Representative program. The Committee provides a forum for state veteran program 

leaders to discuss issues regarding legislation, policy, and procedures for these programs. As Chair, in co-ordination with NASWA staff, I led two annual meetings 

with 15–20 staff to discuss policies and budgets for successful implementation of 

these programs. 

Question 3. The Veterans’ Employment and Training Service (VETS) oversees a 

range of programs and complicated laws. For fiscal year 2013, the President has requested $258 million for VETS, including over $220 million for various grants and 

approximately $38 million for a nationwide staff of 218 Federal workers. 

A. What do you see as the key functions performed by VETS? 

Response. I am committed to serving our military families as well as they’ve 

served us by providing them with the support they need and deserve to successfully 

transition to the civilian workforce and find and secure meaningful careers. VETS 

plays a critical role by serving America’s veterans and separating servicemembers 

by preparing them for meaningful careers, providing employment resources and expertise, and protecting their employment rights. 

B. What do you see as the key responsibilities of the Assistant Secretary for Veterans’ Employment and Training? 

Response. If confirmed, I will consider my responsibilities to be the following: 

leading the organization in an ethical and inclusive manner; building upon the vision of President Obama and Secretary Solis to restore our Nation’s sacred trust 

with Veterans and providing them and transitional servicemembers with better 

services; advising the Secretary on relevant policy matters; and reporting to the Secretary, Members of Congress, and stakeholders on the results of VETS’ efforts. 

C. How has your background prepared you to take on these responsibilities, and 

what prior experiences do you believe qualify you to manage a budget of this size? 

Response. As a veteran myself, I have experienced firsthand the challenges of returning from a combat environment and transitioning into a civilian environment. 

I have a career in public that spans three decades and includes leading, under both 

republican and democratic Governors, three state agencies in two states. These 

agencies have ranged in scope, both in terms of size and budget, as well as in mission. As head of the Farm Service Agency at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

I led an agency of 13,000 full-time employees with a budget of $1.1 billion and today 

as Commissioner of the Montana Department of Labor I oversee an agency with a 

budget of nearly $60 million and 750 full-time employees. 

D. How would you measure your success in fulfilling those responsibilities? 

Response. I believe that I have left each agency stronger, more efficient, and fiscally sound than when I arrived. 

E. What steps would you take to ensure that all of those funds are well spent? 

Response. I take my responsibility as a steward of American tax payer resources 

very seriously, and if confirmed will strive to utilize the resources allocated to VETS 

as efficiently and effectively as possible to accomplish the agency’s mission. 

Question 4. A 2011 Department of Labor Office of Inspector General (IG) report 

on VETS found inappropriate procurement practices within VETS headquarters. 

50 

The report also included other allegations that called into question the agency’s 

workplace culture. This IG report led to the resignation of Assistant Secretary Ray 

Jefferson. What steps will you take to ensure that the problems identified by the 

IG will not reoccur if you are confirmed as the Assistant Secretary? 

Response. I have always maintained the highest ethical and professional standards for myself and my staff. I know the Department of Labor has taken additional 

steps in the wake of Mr. Jefferson’s resignation to ensure that all agency heads and 

staff at the Department understand their responsibilities and obligations under Federal procurement rules and ethics procedures. I will abide by and adhere to those 

requirements and will demand the same of my staff. 

Question 5. According to a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) study, 

there are 23 Federal employment and training programs in which veterans can participate. Of those, six are specifically targeted at veterans and administered by the 

Department of Labor (DOL). Veterans can also participate in programs under the 

Workforce Investment Act, administered by DOL, and receive preference. 

A. What is your current assessment of Federal employment and training programs and how they specifically affect veterans? 

Response. While some employment and training programs may have overlapping 

eligibility, they often have unique goals and outcomes and serve specific subpopulations, for instance the Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program. It seems to me 

that veterans and their families benefit from the variety of services and programs 

available to help them obtain and retain good jobs and become self-sufficient. I also 

believe that veterans benefit from the integration of the veteran specific programs 

into the rest of the workforce investment system where they receive priority of service. This allows veterans to benefit from the diverse array of training and employment programs funded by DOL. 

B. Are veterans currently searching for a job best served with a system that includes many overlapping programs or do you believe that there need to be changes 

made to consolidate services? 

Response. I have not yet had the opportunity to learn about all of the current programs and services in place to determine if there are any changes that may be necessary to ensure veterans are receiving the best services possible. However, if confirmed, I look forward to hearing input both from Congress and stakeholders on how 

to improve the provision of services to veterans. 

C. Do you have any initial recommendations on how to improve the delivery of 

services to ensure that veterans are receiving the most wide ranging and beneficial 

services available? 

Response. I have not yet had the opportunity to learn about all of the current programs and services in place, to determine whether improvements could be made on 

the delivery of services.. However, if confirmed, I look forward to hearing input both 

from Congress and stakeholders on how to improve the provision of services to veterans. 

Question 6. VETS administers programs, including the Jobs for Veterans State 

Grants Program, which provides funding for the Disabled Veterans’ Outreach Program (DVOP) and Local Veterans’ Employment Representative (LVER) program. 

A. What is your initial assessment of this program? 

Response. VETS offers employment and training services to eligible Veterans primarily through Jobs for Veterans State Grants Program (JVSG). JVSG provides 

funding to the states to hire, train and support Veteran employment staff (LVERS 

and DVOPs). These staff specialist are located in a number of service delivery 

points, most notably the American Job Centers that are delivery point for a wide 

set of employment and training services funded by the Workforce Investment Act 

and the Wagner-Peyser Act. While, I have not been fully briefed on the JVSG program, I can say from my own experience that Veterans and eligible spouses benefit 

by the collaboration and coordination of these services and by maximizing the employment and training opportunities developed though relationships with State 

Workforce Agencies. 

B. One concern Congress has voiced regarding this program is the lack of quality 

performance measures to determine each state’s usage of the grant funding. What 

do you believe is the best way to evaluate the effectiveness of grant dollars distributed by this program? 

Response. Like you, I believe in the implementing quality performance metrics to 

strengthen and manage programs on an ongoing basis. Moreover, I take very seriously the responsibility of stewardship of taxpayer dollars and if confirmed would 

work to ensure VETS is regularly monitoring the states’ use of Federal dollars. 

51 

C. Do you have any preliminary thoughts on how this program could be improved 

to better assist veterans with finding jobs? 

Response. Before making specific recommendations, if confirmed I would like the 

opportunity to first initiate a review of states to assess which programs execute successful program implementation and which are facing challenges. That review would 

allow the agency to identify best practices and pinpoint obstacles that may impede 

system-wide implementation. 

Question 7. VETS administers and helps to enforce the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), which provides reemployment 

rights and employment discrimination protections for veterans and members of the 

Guard and Reserves. 

A. Do you foresee the possibility for a surge of USERRA claims as the troop levels 

in Afghanistan are drawn down and more Guard and Reserve members return 

home? If so, what steps would you take to help ensure that any claims from these 

returning servicemembers are handled expeditiously? 

Response. Yes, I believe that there will likely be an increase in USERRA claims 

as increasing numbers of our men and women transition out of active duty service 

and return to the civilian workforce. I am committed, if confirmed, to the President’s 

promise of fighting employment discrimination against veterans and returning servicemembers. USERRA compliance and support will be a top priority. If confirmed, 

I will work to ensure that VETS closes each case within the statutory timeframe, 

or when necessary obtains extensions to continue its investigative efforts. One step 

that I would take is to focus on education and outreach. In my experience, most employers seek to comply with the law and support our Nation’s service men and 

women. Disputes arising under the law are often the result of misunderstandings 

about respective rights and responsibilities, and one of VETS most important functions is to avoid those disputes before they become formal investigations. Thus, if 

confirmed, I will focus on ensuring VETS is continuing to reach out and educate the 

public as well as providing assistance directly to questions and inquiries. 

B. How important is it for VETS to cooperate and coordinate with other entities 

that help enforce USERRA (such as the Office of Special Counsel and the Employer 

Support of the Guard and Reserve) and what steps would you take to facilitate any 

necessary coordination and collaboration? 

Response. Collaboration and coordination are critical to effectively administering 

and enforcing USERRA. As you know, DOL shares responsibility for educating, administering and enforcing USERRA with numerous other agencies including the 

U.S. Office of Special Counsel, the Government Accountability Office, the Office of 

Personnel Management, the Departments of Justice and Defense. I believe that the 

best way to protect the rights of our service men and women, Guard and Reserve 

is to work collaboratively with all entities involved. If confirmed, I will review current processes and the extent of collaboration to ensure that VETS is fully engaging 

with our fellow agencies and fulfilling any and all MOUs. 

C. What role should the Office of Special Counsel play in handling USERRA 

claims? For example, should the Office of Special Counsel be allowed to handle all 

USERRA claims against Federal agencies? 

Response. It would be premature for me to make a judgment in that regard until 

I have an opportunity to fully understand the role that the Office of Special Counsel 

currently plays in the handling of USERRA claims. 

Question 8. During the first half of 2013, VETS will be finalizing its redesign of 

the Transition Assistance Program (TAP), the first such redesign in nearly 20 years. 

The new TAP will be deployed around the world to assist servicemembers prior to 

leaving the military. 

A. Have you had an opportunity to review the new TAP curriculum? And if so, 

do you have any thoughts or concerns about the redesign? 

Response. No, at this time I have not reviewed the curriculum. 

B. Given that performance data on the newly redesigned TAP will not be available 

initially, how will you, if confirmed, determine the effectiveness of TAP in 2013? 

Response. It is my understanding that the Department recently finished piloting 

the new curriculum and has already begun to phase in the new DOL Workshop at 

bases across the country and the initial feedback has been very positive. If confirmed, I would want to work with stakeholders and others to collect feedback from 

participants and develop an initial process for review to ensure continuous improvement and refinement in the program. 

C. TAP is a collaboration between the Department of Defense, DOL, and the Department of Veterans Affairs. If confirmed, how will you ensure that the three agencies work together to provide separating servicemembers with the tools they need? 

52 

Response. I am committed, if confirmed, to working hand in hand with our fellow 

agencies to ensure veterans are aware of and receive the services they need to successfully and seamlessly transition to civilian employment. If confirmed, I would 

also continue to work with DOD, VA and DHS to ensure that the Employment 

Workshop is cleanly integrated into the overall Transition program so that all components complement and build upon the others. 

[The Committee questionnaire for Presidential nominees follows:] 


NomKellyQu1.eps
53 


NomKellyQu2.eps

Montana State University, Bozeman, Mt. 1970-73, M.S. Agriculture Economics and 

Economics 

11. Honors and Awards (List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary 

society memberships, and any other special recognition for outstanding service or 

achievement). 

U.S. ArmyI968-70; Combat Infantry Badge (CIB); Bronze Star 1970 

National Association of Workforce Agencies (NASWA) Eagle Leadership Award, 

2008 

12. Memberships (List all memberships and offices held in professional, fraternal, business, 

scholarly, civic, charitable, and other organizations for the last ten years. Include the 

dates of any such memberships of offices). 

Ancient Order of Hibernians: Member 2007-Present 

Montana 4-H Foundation: Director 2005-2011 

National Assoc. of Workforce Agencies (NASWA) 2004-Present; Secretary 2010 

13. Employment record (List all employment (except military service) since your twentyfirst birthday, including the title, description of job , name of employer, location of work, 

and inclusive dates of employment). 

List below all positions held since the nominee turned 21 years of age, including the title or 

description of job, name of employer, location of work, and dates of inclusive employment. 

SalesmanlOssello's Furniture, Butte, MT. 07/1968-10/1968 

Infantry Soldier/U.S. Army; Republic of Viet Nam 11/1968-09/1970 

Graduate Student/Montana State University; Bozeman, MT 09/1970-06/1973 

Mktg. Specialist/Montana Wheat Commission; Gt. Falls, MT 07/1973-06/1974 

Asst. DirectorlWestern Wheat Associates, Washington, D.C. 07/1974-08/1976 

Admin Asst.! MT Office of the Governor; Helena, MT 09/1976-12/1980 

Deputy Director/MT Dept. of Agriculture; Helena, MT 01/1981-12/1982 

Directorl MT Dept. of Agriculture; Helena, MT 01/1983-12/1988 

Ex. DirectorlHelena Capitol Centennial Comm.; Helena, MT 01/1989-02/1990 
54 


NomKellyQu3.eps

Dep. Secretary of State/State Capitol; Helena, MT 03/1990-06/1990 

Director/Arizona Dept. of Agriculture, Phoenix, AZ. 07/1990-05/1997 

Administrator/Farm Service Agency/USDA; Washington, D.C. 06/1997-01/2001 

President! Kelly & Associates; Alexandria, VA 02/2001-07/2002 

Administrator/MT Dept. of Labor & Industry; Helena, MT 08/2002-12-2004 

Commissioner/MT Dept. of Labor & Industry; Helena, MT 01/2005-present 

14. Military service (List all military service (including reserve components and National 

Guard of Air National Guard) with inclusive dates of service, rank, titles, permanent duty 

stations and units of assignment, descriptions of assignments, any military medals, and 

type of discharge). U.S. Army; Nov 1968-Sep.1970, E-6 SSgt. 101 st Airborne Division, 

Republic of Viet Nam,Oct.69-Sep.70, Combat Infantry Badge(CIB), 1970, Bronze 

Star, Sep.1070; Honorable Discharge,Sep.l070 

Montana National Guard: 1970-71; SSgt., 163rd Calvary Regiment, Bozeman Mt. 

15. Government service record (List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other parttime service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments other than those listed 

under Employment record, above). 

Mt. State Workforce Investment Board: 2004-Present 

Mt. Office of Community Services: member 2004-Present 

*both positions by virtue of being Commissioner of Mt. Dept. of Labor & 

Industry 

16. Published writings and public statements (in last 10 years) 

(a) List the titles, publishers, and dates of books, articles, reports, letters to the editor, 

editorial pieces, or other published materials you have written or edited, including 

materials appearing only on the Internet. (Copies of any such materials may be requested 

by the Committee). As Commissioner of the Montana Department of Labor and 

Industry, there are numerous monthly, quarterly & annual reports that are 

prepared by the agency for public distribution. ie; Economy at a Glance: monthly; 

unemployment statistics: monthly: Labor Day Report: annually; Workers 

Compensation Annual Report; etc. All publications are required by Montana Law 

and a matter of Public Record. 
55 


NomKellyQu4.eps

(b) List any reports, memoranda, or policy statements you prepared or contributed in the 

preparation of on behalf of any association, committee, conference, or organization of 

which you were or are a member. N/ A 

(c) List any testimony, official statements or other communications relating to matters of 

public policy that you have issued or provided or that others presented on your behalf to 

public bodies or officials. As Head of the Agency, I have testified before various 

Montana Legislative Committees in all Bi-annum sessions beginning in 2005 through 

20011 inclusively on proposed bills and appropriation matters that are pertinent to 

the Agency. All testimony is a matter of Public Record and Archived by the Montana 

Legislative Council. 

At the National Level; official testimony and statements of behalf of State 

Workforce Agencies are prepared and delivered by the Washington 

staff/officers of National Assoc. of State Workforce Agencies(NASWA) 

(d) List any speeches or talks delivered by you, including commencement speeches, 

remarks lectures, panel discussions, conferences, political speeches, and question-andanswer sessions. Include the dates and places where such speeches or talks were given. 

As Commissioner of the Mt. Dept. of Labor & Industry(Mt. DLl) for the past 7 Yz 

years, I have given numerous welcome addresses and participated in various panels 

reporting on the programs and policies the Department is charged with 

administering. ie: job training, unemployment trends, economic development issues, 

workers compensation, continuing education trends, veterans training, etc. All 

speeches are extemporaneous with talking points as an outline. The talks may 

include current data the Department collects; presentations of FederallMontana 

Law. I'm estimating that I speak in my official capacity an average of 10-15 times 

per year. All meetings/presentations are subject to Montana Open Meeting Law. 

(e) List all interviews you have given to newspapers, magazines or other publications, 

and radio or television stations (include the dates of such interviews). As Commissioner 

ofthe Montana Department of Labor and Industry, I provide interviews to the press 

on topics the Department has Statutory responsibility over. Most typical are 

radio/television comments upon the press release of the official monthly 

unemployment statistics for the state. I have also conducted interviews/press 

releases on Workers Compensation, safety & wage and hour issues. 

I estimate that approx. 20 press releases under my name are issued annually. 
56 


NomKellyQu5.eps

17. Political affIliations and activities 

(a) List all financial contributions to any political party or election committee during 

the last 10 years. 

National Democratic Committee $500.00 2004 

MT Democratic Party/member $500/yr. 2004-present 

Schweitzer for Governor 2008 $1000 2008 

Clinton for President 2008 $200 2008 

Obama for President 2008 $250 2008 

Tester for Senate 2012 $350 2012 

Obama for President 2012 $500est. online 

Bullock for Governor 2012 $400 2012 

Wilmer for Congress 2012 $200 2012 

Buey for Attorney General 2012 $300 2012 

(b) List all elective public offices for which you have been a candidate and the month 

and year of each election involved. Kessler School Board, Helena Mt. Nov. 

1982 and Nov. 1985. Elected to two 3-yr. terms 

(c) List all memberships and offices held in and services rendered, whether 

compensated or not, to any political party or election committee. 

N/A 

18. Future employment relationships 

(a) State whether you will sever all connection with your present employer, business 

firm, association, or organization if you are confirmed by the Senate. YES 

(b) State whether you have any plans after completing Government service to resume 

employment, affiliation, or practice with your previous employer, business firm, 

association or organization. NO 

(c) What commitments, if any, have been made to you for employment after you 

leave Federal service? NONE 

(d) (If appointed for a term of specified duration) Do you intend to serve the full term 

for which you have been appointed? YES 

(e) (If appointed for an indefinite period) Do you intend to serve until the next 

Presidential election? YES 
57 


NomKellyQu6.eps

19. Potential conflicts ofinterest 

(a) Describe any fmancial arrangements, deferred compensation agreements, or other 

continuing financial, business, or professional dealings which you have with 

business associates, clients, or customers who will be affected by policies which 

you will influence in the position to which you have been nominated. NONE 

(b) List any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other financial relationships which 

could be affected by policies which you will influence in the position to which 

you have been nominated. NONE 

(c) Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial transaction which you 

have had during the last 5 years, whether for yourself, on behalf of a client, or 

acting as an agent, that constitutes a potential conflict of interest with the position 

to which you have been nominated. Natl. Association of Workforce 

Agencies(NASWA) 

(d) Describe any activity during the past 10 years in which you have engaged for the 

purpose of directly or influencing the passage, defeat, or modification of any 

legislation or affecting the administration and execution oflaw or public policy. 

Activities performed as an employee of the Federal government need not be 

listed. NONE; NASWA does lobby on behalf of State Workforce Agencies 

(e) Explain how you will resolve any potential conflict of interest that may be 

disclosed by your responses to the above items. (Please provide a copy of any 

trust or other agreements involved in Part II.) RESIGN membership and 

RECUSE myself of any potential conflict of interest as determined by 

Counsel ofthe USDOL. 

20. Testifying before Congress 

(a) Do you agree to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of the 

Congress upon the request of such committee? YES 

(b) Do you agree to provide such information as is requested by such a committee? 

YES 
58 

[A letter from the Office of Government Ethics follows:] 


KellyEthicsLtr.eps
59 

[Letter from Keith Kelly to the Office of General Counsel, U.S. 

Department of Veterans Affairs:] 


KellyOGELtr1.eps
60 

Chairman MURRAY. Thank you both very much for your testimony. We will now turn to a period of questions from the Committee members, and I will begin. 

Mr. Greenberg, as I mentioned in my opening statement, and 

particularly over the past year, we have seen the claims backlog 

continue to grow at the VA. The error rates remain high, and the 

number and complexity of claims is continuing to rise. Each of 

those facts is going to impact the court and its workload. And on 

the other side of it, the court has to make sure that veterans have 

a very meaningful judicial review of the decision. 

There has been some debate here in Congress about how Congress and the stakeholders should measure the court in meeting its 

responsibilities and I wanted to ask you, in your opinion, how 

should court efficiency be measured? 

Mr. GREENBERG. Well, I believe Congress already has a certain 

way of looking at it. In the statute creating the court, it requires 

the court to report annually to Congress on the disposition of its 

cases in various categories. That does not deal at all, in my view, 

with the qualitative determinations, but merely asks the court to 

report, as it does, each year on its disposition rate. 

My view is that, as with all Federal courts for which these reports are required, the Committee, or Congress as a whole, should 

take a very close look at whether the mere disposition of a certain 

number of cases is consistent with a qualitative determination on 

a case-by-case basis. But it is a court of appellate review and, 

therefore, sets precedent. 

My own review of the cases over the last 5 years has been that 

the court probably does a very superior job when compared with 

other courts of appeal in the Federal system in prompt disposition 

of a large number of cases that come before it. My own experience 

is generally with the other courts of appeal and the Federal District Courts, and I would say that it compares very favorably, in 

my view, based upon my experience, substantively as well as quantitatively. 

My own view is it probably can expect to have a great deal more 

by way of work to do, and I would expect that I would be part of 

that workload; and I would expect the workload to increase; and I 


KellyOGELtr2.eps
61 

would expect the workload to require, in my view, a more explicit 

explanation in each case for the determination so that it acts more 

explicitly as precedential value. That is my view of it. 

Chairman MURRAY. OK. During the past few years of your professional career, you have been a very forceful advocate for our servicemembers and veterans. In fact, you noted, in response to the 

Committee’s questionnaire, that you have come to consider yourself 

as a soldier’s lawyer. 

Mr. GREENBERG. Yes. 

Chairman MURRAY. How would you respond to those who would 

question your ability to be impartial, given your record of strong 

advocacy on behalf of servicemembers and their—— 

Mr. GREENBERG. That is a very good question, Chairman. Sorry. 

As you will also note from my record of 45 years, it seems like a 

long time, but I feel, looking in that mirror, as if I am looking at 

a 25-year-old lawyer with enthusiasm. My wife will disagree. She 

can see me from the back—— 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. GREENBERG [continuing]. And knows that a lot of poundage 

has increased over those years. 

But my view is that I have taken an oath as a soldier, as a lawyer, as a crime commissioner, as Chairman of the RFPB, and when 

I take those oaths, I think I have adhered to those oaths. So there 

may be an inconsistency in all the things that I have done over the 

course of a very long career, but I believe in my heart of hearts, 

without question, having seen judges, appellate and trial judges, 

knowing them as lawyers before they were in those positions, that 

I can fairly, impartially, and most importantly, or as importantly, 

efficiently, meaning swiftly, adhere to my oath of office, notwithstanding the fact that I have been an advocate exclusively for lawyers—excuse me, for soldiers—when it is a soldier case. 

Chairman MURRAY. OK. I appreciate that very much. 

Mr. Kelly, let me turn to you. Last year, Congress passed and 

the President signed into law the VOW to Hire Heroes Act. That 

legislation included provisions like mandatory TAP and increased 

education and training opportunities for our servicemembers and 

veterans and underscores the real need for Labor and Defense and 

VA to work together to address unemployment for our veterans. In 

your opinion, what can these departments do and how will you 

work collaboratively to ease the transition between military and civilian life? 

Mr. KELLY. Thank you, Chairwoman Murray. You have hit on a 

very specific and important thing, the collaboration of working together between the agencies. I am most familiar with the role of 

the U.S. Department of Labor and veterans’ issues. However, I am 

fully aware that the Veterans Administration, the Department of 

Defense, and I guess Homeland Security have a piece of that, too. 

I will point to how will I address that. I am a very collaborative 

sort of person. We all have the very same goal: that is to treat veterans and, as simply and succinctly as possible, to get them the 

best services. We are all on that same page. And so it is working 

across the agencies. 

My experience, I will point out in Arizona, I ‘‘created’’ the Arizona Department of Agriculture after the legislature mandated the 

62 

situation of creating a cabinet-level department. It was four very 

different cultures that were brought together: the Arizona Livestock Board; the Arizona Ag and Horticulture Commission; and two 

other boards and one other commission, to make a cohesive department that has different cultures. 

My other sense is that we all have our expertise in life—I am 

mostly familiar with the Department of Labor and Industry in our 

State—and throughout the country are experts, and I recognize 

that, as such; and with regards to employment and training across 

the gamut for whomever it is, and now with specific emphasis and 

a priority of service given to veterans. 

So I really look forward to working with my counterparts in the 

appropriate way in these other major agencies of the Federal Government. I welcome it. We are all headed to the same place. Thank 

you. 

Chairman MURRAY. OK. I have used my time. I am going to turn 

it over to Senator Burr. 

Senator BURR. Thank you, Chairman. 

To both of you, thank you for your service to the country. 

Mr. GREENBERG. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator BURR. Mr. Kelly, we have exhausted a lot of questions 

and answers and the only thing that I missed in my conversation 

with you was that you were friends with Tester. [Laughter.] 

Now, that might have generated a different line of questions to 

cover, but I will overlook that and I will move to Mr. Greenberg. 

Mr. Greenberg, I mentioned that I hope Congress will soon pass 

legislation requiring judges of the Veterans Court to live in the 

D.C. area, where the court is located. The current Chief Judge expressed his belief that, ‘‘the idea of residency requirement in the 

area is the encouragement of the members to recognize that the 

court’s presence is here at the chambers or here, the court staff are 

here, their hearing room is here, and that you can come to agreement better when you see eye to eye.’’ Do you have any disagreement with that? 

Mr. GREENBERG. Not at all. 

Senator BURR. Good. Mr. Greenberg, you also indicated in your 

statement earlier, you have worked in the legal profession for almost four decades and served in the Army for 27 years as a Reservist. After such a long and successful career, what led you to want 

to do this? 

Mr. GREENBERG. Well, it is a very good question. It is now 45 

years. It was four decades when I started my program, and that 

is the relationship. That is what makes me want to do this, is what 

I have seen over the last 10 years in everyday practice. I have been 

in a situation where the Army refuses to give adjournments to lawyers representing soldiers at their hearings at Walter Reed, so the 

Chief Justice of New Jersey and the Chief Federal Judge said, you 

are doing good work. You get the adjournments from the judges 

and we will let you go to Washington. 

I have just experienced 10 years of working with wounded and 

injured soldiers that convinced me that after a lifetime in private 

practice with these other public service commitments, all of which 

were part-time; and when the opportunity, honestly, arose through 

the President and Senator Menendez, I said yes, with alacrity. 

63 

Senator BURR. I appreciate that answer. You were the one who 

alluded to how long in the tooth you might be getting. 

Mr. GREENBERG. Yes. 

Senator BURR. I just remind you that this is a 15-year term—— 

Mr. GREENBERG. Yes. 

Senator BURR [continuing]. And it has an exit point after ten. 

But I just want to make sure, and I am sure you are astute enough 

to recognize the fact that after that 10 years, there is the likelihood 

that a Chief Judge can recall a judge back to the bench. Just understanding that that comes with the duties, you are comfortable 

with that? 

Mr. GREENBERG. They are going to have to pry my cold hand 

from the gavel at age 85, if I am confirmed and live that long. The 

rule of 80 does not interest me at all, Senator. 

Senator BURR. That probably is more in your wife’s hands. 

Mr. GREENBERG. Well, that is right. [Laughter.] 

Senator BURR. As you mentioned, a judge needs to be impartial 

in their decisions. So permit me to explore a few of your quotes and 

your answers to questions. 

In 2009, you were quoted as saying the disability system for military personnel should be overhauled because, ‘‘creates this way of 

looking at things so that individuals at fairly low levels think they 

are saving the government money by haggling with wounded soldiers.’’ Let me just give you an opportunity to clarify. Do you believe that government employees are intentionally providing inadequate ratings just to save money? 

Mr. GREENBERG. No. By the way, that was addressed to the military evaluation system, the so-called MEB/PEB side of things, rather than the veterans’ side, although I will say, in fairness, that it 

could be applied. I do not think there is any ill will. I do not think 

there is any animus toward soldiers or veterans. I think there are 

probably a lot of reasons for it. But in my personal experience, the 

inclination, rather than—seems to be one of looking at a claim from 

an insurance company standpoint as opposed to a, what I would 

hope would be perhaps an irrebuttable presumption, but a presumption nonetheless, in favor of the soldier or the veteran. That 

is the point I was trying to make and that is—I hope I am clarifying it. 

Senator BURR. Sure. Along the same lines, you have said that 

servicemembers who are being medically discharged from the military should not have to prove the extent of their disabilities in 

order to receive benefits. In fact, in response to a prehearing question, you said that you believe, ‘‘the medically unfit soldier should 

receive 100 percent compensation.’’ Now, how would that belief impact your ability to be impartial when it comes to decisions in front 

of the court? 

Mr. GREENBERG. Twofold, Senator, if I may. 

Senator BURR. Sure. 

Mr. GREENBERG. Senator, one, that does relate exclusively to the 

military side, and I have always had a philosophical view that if— 

and a practical view in arguing these cases at Walter Reed, which 

is the hearing location that begins the process, or is in the middle 

of it—that if you are medically unfit, why are we talking about percentages, which is an entirely different thing than on the veterans’ 

64 

side, where you have a service-connected condition or disability and 

where a percentage of that disability is a relevant consideration. 

You are either fit or unfit, in my philosophical view, on the military 

side. 

To answer part two of the question that you posed, Senator, I 

have no difficulty—once I take the oath—I have been an advocate 

all my life. I have also been in a position as a Commissioner, as 

the Chairman of the RFPB, to listen to all sides and make recommendations. In this case, if honored to be confirmed and I take 

that oath, I take the oath seriously. 

Senator BURR. So you would have no problem ruling against a 

disabled veteran seeking a higher disability rating if the facts did 

not substantiate that? 

Mr. GREENBERG. Facts and law, exactly. 

Senator BURR. My last is question along those lines. You stated 

in the prehearing questions, ‘‘the determination of percentage disabilities, if they are to be retained, should never be reduced but 

only increased if a soldier makes a case for a change in circumstances.’’ Is that, again, just on the military side, or how would 

you respond if, in fact, the VA sought a reduction in benefits and 

the substantiation was there for it? 

Mr. GREENBERG. Again, that is a philosophical point of view. It 

is fundamentally the military side. It focused, in my mind, on the 

PTSD situation, which I encountered in a great many cases. But 

the same answer would be true there, with respect, Senator—that 

is, if the law required me as a Federal appellate judge on this court 

to make a determination resulting in a reduction, I would, if the 

facts dictated it. 

I was stating my own personal view that there should be some 

repose with the veteran, that if he or she were granted a certain 

percentage of disability they should have the comfort or the knowledge of knowing that that cannot be taken away from them. I assume that there was a legitimate process which resulted in the 

award or the determination, that they went through the appellate 

process and came to that conclusion. That is more philosophy than 

anything else. And again, if Congress does not change the law, if 

the requirements remain the same and it can go up and down, it 

would be determined on a case-by-case factual basis. 

Senator BURR. OK. My clock is broken. My time has probably 

run out. But since my clock is broken, I am going to ask one more 

question. 

Mr. GREENBERG. Yes, sir. 

Senator BURR. The Chairman already alluded to this. During 

2011, it took an average of 584 days for an appellant to receive a 

single-judge decision from the Veterans Court and it took 763 days 

for an appellant to receive a decision by a panel of judges. Based 

upon your years of litigation experience, can you set what you 

think is a reasonable timeframe for the court to make a decision? 

Mr. GREENBERG. A lot less than that. I cannot quantify it—— 

Senator BURR. I think that—— 

Mr. GREENBERG. By the way, I took a look at the last report that 

was required by Congress, the 2011 report. You might have more 

updated information than I do. But as I read it, the report compares the disposition of cases by this court most favorably with all 

65 

other courts of appeal. Now, this is a specialized court, I understand that, and it is more likely that you have single-judge dispositions in this court than panels, and so forth. But if honored to be 

confirmed, I am ready to hit the ground running, as I think you 

alluded to, and I am sure there is a way, even with what I would 

anticipate is a greater increase in the number of appeals, to work 

it out so that that length of time, which sounded a little long to 

me, Senator, with respect—I am sure you have the facts better 

than I do, but—— 

Senator BURR. I think the Chairman alluded to the fact that this 

is the only thing that we have to gauge it on and—— 

Mr. GREENBERG. Yes. 

Senator BURR [continuing]. We think it is—— 

Mr. GREENBERG. I think it is too long. 

Senator BURR. And I would, on behalf of all of us, solicit any 

thoughts that you have on an ongoing basis as to how we can 

change that to make sure that our veterans and their families do 

not have to wait too long for these decisions, and that is an ongoing 

solicitation. 

Again, Mr. Kelly, thank you. I will not hold Tester against you. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. Greenberg, thank you. 

Chairman MURRAY. I would just add, if that is the right way to 

measure these very complex cases, increased workloads. I think 

that is a question that needs to be asked, as well. Thank you very 

much. 

Senator Tester. 

Senator TESTER. Well, I want to start out by saying thanks to 

Ranking Member Burr for his openness. 

As long as you are warmed up, Mr. Greenberg, could you, as concisely as you possibly can, tell me what the position—describe the 

position that you are being nominated for. 

Mr. GREENBERG. It is one of nine judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, an Article I court, meaning I do not 

serve during good behavior. I serve for a fixed term of 15 years. It 

has an extremely narrow jurisdiction set by Congress, which I fully 

understand and understood when I was asked if I would be willing 

to serve on this board, if nominated and confirmed. And that narrow jurisdiction, relatively speaking, is to make legal and constitutional determinations of the administrative decisions below and not 

to substitute the court’s judgment on a de novo basis for that made 

by the agency below. That is in the statute. That is how I understand it. 

Senator TESTER. Very good. They have talked about backlogs. 

They have talked about your background, and I applaud you both 

for what you have done. One of the things—and I am not an attorney—from the job that you have described that I think would be 

very, very difficult is people who are appealing a previous decision 

that have an unseen injury, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, a 

Traumatic Brain Injury, the signature injuries coming out of Iraq 

and now Afghanistan. What criteria do you use in that particular 

case to make a decision to determine whether you are going to rule 

on the side of the soldier or—— 

66 

Mr. GREENBERG. Well, again, this is an appellate court and the 

determination is made on the record made below. That is why 

there are a great number of remands for additional information or 

additional testimony or evidence, whatever it is. Remember—I 

hope I am answering your question—there is no statute of limitations on a veteran making an initial claim. The problem begins to 

develop once you are within the system, and that is where these 

time limits become important to the veterans’ claims. So if you go 

all the way through the court and then develop this condition, 

which the onset may not come for years—— 

Senator TESTER. That is correct. 

Mr. GREENBERG [continuing]. You can start all over again and 

add that. But I would—it is not up to me, it is really up to Congress—make a determination as to how to either allow a consolidation of the new claim or expand upon that claim at any point in 

the judicial process, in other words, while the case is pending before the court. 

Senator TESTER. OK. 

Mr. GREENBERG. So that is up to Congress to do, not up to the 

court. 

Senator TESTER. I have got you. That is fine. 

Mr. Kelly, you know all too well the unemployment rates. Montana fares a little better than most of the country, but the fact is 

that it is unacceptably high in the private sector and it is particularly unacceptably high amongst our veterans, and if you want to 

add Native Americans on top of that, it continues to get higher and 

higher. You have been addressing this issue for some time. I guess 

what I would ask is, having served at the State level, what lessons 

have you learned? 

Mr. KELLY. Thank you, Chairwoman Murray, Senator Tester. 

The last 8 years in this economy, this economic hiccup that we 

went through, I have learned a lot. Of course, the unemployment 

piece is within the Department of Labor and Industry in Montana, 

as well, with all the extended unemployment benefits. As the rural 

State that Montana is, it is always a challenge of providing services 

out there to the people. 

And what I guess I have learned most, and I want to compliment 

both the Chair and the Vice Chair, with regards to one of the hiccups on licensing and those things that go along with certifications, 

is kind of a key point to keep moving this and getting these veterans brought back into the workforce somehow. There has got to 

be a better way. Montana is a little unique from most State labor 

departments, but the professional occupational licensings are within the jurisdiction of the Department of Labor and Industry and 

that is clearly something—there are 50 State laws to look at with 

the rules and policies and regulations and who can be an EMT or 

who can be a truck driver, and so the gatekeepers there at those 

States need to be synchronized, and I look forward to working with 

the States to get that, which seems to be a very fixable piece to 

address. 

In Montana, I think the biggest challenge is unemployment, and 

I think we just now are going to announce coming underneath 6 

percent. And with that is some of the training that this handicap 

or this impediment that is out there for those people who could cerVerDate Nov 24 2008 17:45 Mar 15, 2013 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 H:\ACTIVE\121212.TXT PAULIN
67 

tainly work in the oil patch between North Dakota that has certainly moved into Montana. In a lot of those positions, there just 

seems like, to me, there is some common sense type of work activity there. 

And so I—you know, on the ground and delivering these services, 

it is always a challenge, the collaboration. We have those same 

challenges at the State Government level that you pointed out here 

at the Federal level, and that I have learned, as well, and have 

been able to navigate through most of them. 

Senator TESTER. My time is up. 

Chairman MURRAY. Senator Isakson. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHNNY ISAKSON, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM GEORGIA 

Senator ISAKSON. Mr. Kelly, I like Jon Tester, so I have no problem whatsoever. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. KELLY. So do I. 

Senator ISAKSON. He is a great Member of the Committee and 

the Senate. 

As you know, last year, we made the TAP program mandatory 

in terms of transition assistance. 

Mr. GREENBERG. Yes. 

Senator ISAKSON. One of the reasons we did that was because 

there seemed to be a black hole that veterans fall in between finding opportunities and being prepared for those opportunities. What 

will you do in your position to close that black hole and assure opportunity and preparation are major efforts of the Department of 

Labor and the Department of Defense for our veterans? 

Mr. KELLY. Thank you, Senator Isakson. I applaud the effort 

that is ongoing right now, in the whole rework of the TAP and the 

mandatory piece in that, to really keep that moving. 

As front-end as we can, and on the back end, to make sure that 

these people are exposed to TAP, I really applaud and like the idea 

that they do that in a military setting for the very first, initial 

time, because the culture in the military setting—you are pretty 

well managed in the military culture to the point of blowing taps 

at six o’clock in the morning to get up. So now they are transitioning into a whole civilian life where more of the accountability and 

responsibility falls to them, and I think them being aware of that 

sooner than later is better. The whole TAPS rewrite as I understand it is just underway of finalizing, kind of getting rolled up 

with the Department of Labor’s piece is very important. 

The other part, which I tried to emphasize in my testimony is 

the inclusiveness of the whole family, which I think is very important. It was in our case. I can look back at that and that struggle. 

I have witnessed it with big mass layoffs in certain other places 

there. The networking that spouses do can help move the various 

things along is critically important. 

So my sense is, and I am not an expert on that, but it does seem 

to be removed with regard to TAPS, that we are kind of working 

across the agencies better and getting the total picture more holistically of the resources that should be available to these veterans 

to go forward. That is my sense of it. 

68 

We in Montana, I think, probably—going back to what Senator 

Tester said about other lessons learned—we get about 40 percent 

that come in the door of the local one-stop job service office. The 

other 60 percent, where are they at? That has been a challenge and 

a problem, and I think I have shared that with—I think it was 

Senator Burr—that that is the sacred DD–214. That starts a lot of 

things up. We are finally getting that so we can help track that. 

It is the data that—and running these people is not the right word, 

but being able to know their last address or telephone number or 

contact number is critically important. 

So, hopefully, I think the cap is certainly positive and we are 

moving in a good direction. It seems to me that it is well underway 

and I am encouraged to work with Congress, review it, see where 

it is really working, what are the unintended consequences, and 

keep pushing to make a more streamlined process. 

Senator ISAKSON. Well, we appreciate your service to the country 

and your taking on this responsibility. 

Mr. Greenberg—— 

Mr. GREENBERG. Yes, Senator. 

Senator ISAKSON [continuing]. Your November 9, 2009, article in 

the Star-Ledger is what probably prompted both the Chairman and 

the Ranking Member’s question about ‘‘can you handle these decisions objectively because you were so passionate in your advocacy 

about the system.’’ I am not a lawyer, but I learned a long time 

ago that a lawyer’s judgment is directly proportionate to who is 

paying him. So I assume you understand that you will be paid by 

the American taxpayer in your new job and that is the way, yes, 

that will ensure your objectivity in those decisions. 

Mr. GREENBERG. Yes. 

Senator ISAKSON. Good. I happen to share a lot of the passion 

that you had in that particular article and I hope you will take, as 

a judge and an arbiter of individual decisions, some time to help 

advocate on what we can do to compress the time to go from the 

serviceman being injured to he or she getting a determination of 

disability. It is really offensive to me that we have not been able 

to shorten the time. I know we have to have a judicial review. I 

know we have to have medical review. I know a lot of these are 

sort of tissue injuries, not broken bones. But it is critical, I think, 

to improve it where it goes from almost 2 years, if you go through 

the appeal process—— 

Mr. GREENBERG. That is right. 

Senator ISAKSON [continuing]. To some reasonable period of time, 

because these people have given everything for the country. We 

owe them the benefits that they have fought for and earned, and 

we owe them an expedited review that is judicious. 

You are a very outspoken individual and I read what you said 

about Fort Hood and that tragedy. I have read some of the things 

that you have done. I hope you will take that passion and be an 

advocate to the Veterans Administration as to how they can better 

expedite these claims. You will be reviewing these claims and be 

making judgments on appeals, which means you will have the 

whole fact record before you. Be an outspoken judge, just as you 

have been an outspoken lawyer, and just remember who is paying 

you when you make those decisions. 

69 

Mr. GREENBERG. I will, Senator. Thank you very much. 

Actually, if I may, Chairman, just respond to the Senator. If I 

may add, I do not ever anticipate losing the passion or objectivity. 

I have to exercise objectivity in every case. Shall we settle, I say 

to my client. We had terrific results because we have won below 

or we have gotten an adequate award for them. But I would bring, 

I think, 45 years of that function, the concept of being an advocate, 

being in a courtroom, dealing with judges, adversaries, clients, to 

this particular unique set of circumstances. I view that as a plus 

in my qualifications, with great respect, Senator, that I will not 

lightly lose that enthusiasm regardless of age or who is paying me, 

and I understand who is paying me and I understand the role of 

a judge. 

Senator ISAKSON. Well, I appreciate that answer, and my time is 

up, but let me just end with a comment. You have a unique opportunity to be a change agent. You have been on every side of the 

issue, from representing the veteran to representing the taxpayer. 

You are going to review every bit of the process from the time of 

entry to the time of decision. So you have the opportunity, if you 

take advantage of it, to advocate for changes we can make as a 

government in our system to improve the efficiency with which we 

make these decisions and, I think, be much more fair to our veterans. So I hope you will do that. 

Mr. GREENBERG. Thank you, Senator. 

Chairman MURRAY. Well stated, Senator Isakson. Thank you. 

Senator Begich. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARK BEGICH, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you very much. 

Let me follow, if I can, on that, Mr. Greenberg, and thank you 

for your willingness to put your name forward and serve. We have 

talked a lot here about the appeal process and how to improve it, 

or that we all want to improve it, that we want to make it more 

efficient. Can you—maybe it is too early, but my guess is that your 

mind is already working in hope of being appointed—what do you 

see as some specific ideas, and maybe you cannot do it right now, 

but some specific ideas that you see to really improve the system 

so when those cases do come before you, that they can be dealt 

with in a fairly decent manner, but also the system prior to that. 

Do you have any specific thoughts? 

My guess is your mind is kind of working on it. As you probably 

got the suggestion of being appointed to this position, you have 

been thinking of all these things and you are anxious to kind of 

probably get to work. But do you have any thoughts on the specifics? I know we have talked all about—we all are on the same 

page here, improving the system—— 

Mr. GREENBERG. Yes, and I appreciate the question, Senator. I 

would not presume—A, I have not been confirmed—— 

Senator BEGICH. Correct. 

Mr. GREENBERG. B, I have not served 1 day on that court—— 

Senator BEGICH. Fair. 

Mr. GREENBERG [continuing]. And so I would not presume to—— 

Senator BEGICH. Have all—— 

70 

Mr. GREENBERG [continuing]. Substitute my judgment—— 

Senator BEGICH. Sure. 

Mr. GREENBERG [continuing]. For those of people with experience. But what I have done is been a lawyer all these years and 

seen how courts of all kinds, all—— 

Senator BEGICH. Right. 

Mr. GREENBERG [continuing]. And I think the mere fact that a 

person from the private sector with this long record that I have in 

and of itself may prove to be a beneficial example. Let us apply 

some of the things that happen in everyday courtrooms and everyday appellate courts to this specialized court. That is number 1. 

I mean, there is no substitute, as I said, for the personal relationship, and there is no substitute for collegiality or a feeling that 

someone is bringing something that we have not had before. Again, 

I would never presume to substitute my experience or judgment for 

those who sit there. I believe in collegiality, but I also believe that 

it is a good thing to get somebody from a different background 

every now and then, particularly on a specialized court such as 

this. 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you, Mr. Greenberg. 

Let me follow up to the Ranking Member’s comment regarding 

presence here, being here, having the court here, but let me take 

you now to an extreme situation. I come from Alaska, which is very 

rural. We utilize video-teleconferencing quite a bit from hearings to 

medicine to education. Are you—tell me your feelings on that. You 

know, to be frank with you, to have a veteran come from a small 

village in Alaska to have to deal with their case in this body here 

in Washington, DC, spending, my guess would be, based on my 

own experience, if you travel from a small village to Washington, 

DC, that experience, being here 3–4 days, could be $6,000 or 

$7,000: hotel, travel, time away. It is very expensive. 

Mr. GREENBERG. It is. 

Senator BEGICH. So, tell me your view on how to utilize videoteleconferencing and would you be seeing that as an opportunity, 

recognizing no one is denied that right to come face to face. So tell 

me your thoughts on that. 

Mr. GREENBERG. Well, I will answer your question this way, and 

then if you would like, I would comment on the implication of the 

Ranking Member’s question, as well. 

Number 1, I do not have any difficulty with that. You have 

that—the big Ninth Circuit includes Alaska—— 

Senator BEGICH. That is right. 

Mr. GREENBERG [continuing]. And goes all the way down the 

coast. You cannot have a bigger circuit geographically than that. So 

that presents problems. The much maligned Ninth Circuit, I might 

say, has done a very good job on that Veterans for Common Sense 

opinion that they then reversed. I may be going off topic a little 

here, but—— 

Senator BEGICH. I feel your passion. 

Mr. GREENBERG [continuing]. But it was reversed by the court, 

so that will be the rule. That will be the law. 

As to making available either individual judges or panels of 

judges to ride the circuit and handle—I think it has to be done efficiently, when you have a whole group of cases. We are going to sit 

71 

here for 3 days in the far West or the Midwest or wherever, and 

we are going to hear these cases, then we are going to take them 

back to Washington to decide. I have no difficulty with that, with 

the use of very sophisticated technological abilities. 

But, to answer Senator Burr’s question, I do not see how the 

court can work unless it comes together and meets on a regular, 

daily basis—— 

Senator BEGICH. As a body. 

Mr. GREENBERG [continuing]. Here, as a body, in Washington. 

Senator BEGICH. Very good. 

Mr. GREENBERG. That is my view. 

Senator BEGICH. OK. Mr. Kelly, let me—and I appreciate the position and I appreciate that you are from Montana for a lot of reasons, and because it is a rural State. I would tell Jon, not as rural 

as Alaska, but we would debate that all the time, and we do. Both 

of our States have a sizable amount of veterans per capita, the 

highest in the Nation. And the last occupant of your position, Ray 

Jefferson, we had him come up to Alaska. I encourage, I invite you 

up there. He came in February. That gave him a lot of extra points, 

just to say that out loud here. So think about that. Winter is better, extra points, but you have been in Montana, so you are used 

to it. 

I would ask you to come up there, but on a larger issue, more 

and more veterans are living in rural parts of our country, Alaska, 

Montana, North Dakota, so forth and so on. Do you have any specific kind of thoughts of how you will go after that group to make 

sure they have the ability to be employed, and knowing that you 

have Department of Labor programs, you have VA programs, you 

have programs in HHS—I mean, there are all these different programs around—how you can help crystalize those programs and 

hone them to really help our veterans in rural areas. 

Mr. KELLY. Well, thank you, Senator; and I really do look forward, even if it is February, coming to Alaska. I look forward to 

it. And I have the same challenges that your veterans in Alaska 

have, which is transportation, getting from here to there. 

Senator BEGICH. That is right. 

Mr. KELLY. As you know, it is not easy. Our gateway is through 

Seattle to most things happening in Alaska, and I look forward to 

that. 

Senator BEGICH. That is good. 

Mr. KELLY. And I think it was mentioned here, House Resolution 

4072, that we try to work forward with the ideas that you may 

have here, that helps us within the Federal Government, across the 

multiple agencies that are serving veterans, to make a more seamless product. I am anxious to work with the VA. I am anxious to 

work with the Defense Department to see where the pieces are, 

that we would all bring our expertise to the table. Where do we together say, you know, the goal is the same. Where can we find 

ways to streamline that whole process? 

Specifically to rural veterans, Montana is in the very same situation, and I think of it as a lesson learned. The State of Montana 

has 23 job service offices—600-and-some miles across, 400 miles 

this way—scattered across a very rural State, and a total of combined 12 DVOPs and LVERs. Now, of course, you assign them to 

72 

work some of the highest needs and priorities, like the air base in 

Great Falls would obviously be one, and, of course, one of the major 

metropolitan areas on a Montana standard, Billings, Montana. But 

we also need to be mindful of the person up in Glasgow, Montana, 

which is a long ways from anywhere. 

And with that, through our workforce services, that is why my 

experience, which I am committed to, is that we have the WagnerPeyser, the Workforce Investment Act, those local one-stop shops 

there, where our DVOPs and LVERs are co-located, at least in 

Montana, to provide that service. The scarce resources we have all 

been faced with in the last decade, my experience in my 8 years 

here is to be innovative and creative, knowing you have got to 

cover all the bases; and with those DVOPs and LVERs and other 

resource personnel, so we are not spending all the windshield time 

running somebody out from here to there. 

The other piece that was mentioned, I think, was the technology 

idea. My sense is that there is nothing better than personal, faceto-face time. My experience has been that. However, I do recognize 

in this world, and there is a whole generation out there that is very 

comfortable with the newer technology, that you can address isolated parts of Montana that probably had no option before, or an 

isolated part of frontier Alaska that there were no options for. 

So with the technology, we have Internet, too. I know you do in 

Alaska. And I know that probably you can now stream into some 

of these places that—— 

Senator BEGICH. Right. 

Mr. KELLY [continuing]. I am not sure what the challenges were 

10 or 15 years ago. They just probably did not spend the several 

thousand dollars to come and make an argument. And so technology is helping us, I think, kind of interconnecting us together 

some, most of it in a good way, I hope. 

Senator BEGICH. Let me just say thank you very much, and 

again, I look forward to hopefully both of you being confirmed. We 

will talk more as you get, hopefully, into office, and spend the time 

discussing what we can do to make sure all these different departments are coordinated on job opportunities for our veterans. Thank 

you very much. 

Mr. KELLY. Thank you. 

Chairman MURRAY. Thank you very much, Senator Begich. 

I just had one last question for you, Mr. Kelly. You are up for 

nomination to an agency and department that is extremely important to many Members of this Committee, I think to the country, 

in terms of making sure that our veterans are employed. It is what 

I hear when I talk to veterans everywhere, that one of their biggest 

concerns is getting a job, and you will be overseeing an agency that 

has a lot to do with that. So my question really to you is, day one, 

what is going to be your priority? 

Mr. KELLY. Thank you. Day one, the priority is collaboration, to 

visit with the Congressional people that know a lot more about this 

and the issues that you face and the stakeholders; to really ask, 

where are the impediments, the true impediments, to better understand and develop the information to get that service to people. I 

have a sense of it, a personal sense of what it is. Some of it is the 

barriers for these people who cannot get to training. It is a perVerDate Nov 24 2008 17:45 Mar 15, 2013 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 H:\ACTIVE\121212.TXT PAULIN
73 

sonal barrier. I watch it from running a State agency. And so outreach to all of those stakeholders, especially, you know, The American Legion, VFW, the Vietnam veterans groups, that they probably have got a pretty good body of information. Here is where the 

hiccups are in the system and here is what you need to do to address them; to get that collaborative effort going. 

And at the same time and in parallel on day one is to start the 

process of working with Congress. I applaud you folks for all the 

things that you have done trying to get us all on the same page, 

working better together, and I am really anxious to work on that 

piece of it with our other Federal stakeholders here. 

Chairman MURRAY. What do you think the biggest challenge is 

today? 

Mr. KELLY. Today? Chairwoman, I have served in bureaucracies 

a long time. Somehow, we can get ourselves, I will not use the word 

‘‘stovepiped,’’ but we can get the barriers up with laws and regulations. The point you made in here on certification and licenses is 

a classic example. Fifty States are following specifically the laws 

that are before them, that they have promulgated by their boards 

and what not, on what it takes to become an EMT in Montana or 

Washington or someplace else, and that creates a real roadblock, 

I see. That is one example with regards to what we are trying to 

do to provide service in the cross-certification and cross-licensure 

that veterans are faced with. 

I read the papers, too. It is very obvious to me that, somehow, 

in the eyes of the public, we have failed, or not the word ‘‘failed.’’ 

It is a quantum leap from the Vietnam days. We have recognized 

the veterans now. It is time for us to say, welcome here, and here 

is something I can do for you. 

An improving job market in the holistic sense will help take care 

of that. The training out there and the certification and licensure, 

it seems to me from visiting with several of you in the past several 

days, it seems to be kind of a point that I think is a problem. 

Chairman MURRAY. Thank you. Thank you very much, both of 

you. 

Senator Burr, did you have any additional questions? 

Senator BURR. No. 

Chairman MURRAY. Senator Tester? 

Senator TESTER. You actually asked them. 

Chairman MURRAY. All right. Very good. 

Well, I want to thank both of our nominees for being here today 

and for answering our questions, and most importantly, thank you 

for your desire to serve our Nation’s veterans. The importance of 

these nominations cannot be stressed enough. It is critical to put 

in place permanent leadership at VETS and provide the court with 

needed support, so Senator Burr, I look forward to working with 

you on moving these nominations in an expeditious way. 

With that, this hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:18 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(75) 

A P P E N D I X 

LETTER OF SUPPORT FROM CHARLES MCGLEW, FOUNDER, 

WORKFORCE DATA SERVICES LLC 

From: chuck@workforcedataservices.com 

To: VAEmail (Veterans Affairs) 

Subject: WebSite Email 

Date: Sunday, December 02, 2012 2:44:15 PM 

Mr. CHARLES MCGLEW

4027 Centennial Drive 

Broomfield, CO 80023 

RE: CONFIRMATION HEARING FOR KEITH KELLY

I strongly encourage the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs to confirm the appointment of Mr. Keith Kelly to be the Assistant Secretary for Veterans Employment and Training within the ETA of the USDOL. 

I am a veteran and was an Unemployment Insurance Director for the Connecticut 

DOL for many years. I had the pleasure of working with Mr. Kelly in his position 

as Commissioner of the Montana DOL. In the past few years in my position as a 

workforce development consultant I have had many occasions to meet with Mr. 

Kelly and discuss topics relating to workforce development in general and with regard to issues facing veterans. 

In my experience Mr. Kelly is an able administrator, has expert insight into 

issues relating to veterans employment, and will provide the leadership and expertise to ensure that veterans employment and training issues are addressed at the 

national level and throughout the state networks of workforce development agencies. 

Thank you. 

Æ