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

44–119 PDF 2009

S. Hrg. 110–946 

NOMINATION OF ELAINE C. DUKE 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

ON THE 

NOMINATION OF ELAINE C. DUKE TO BE UNDER SECRETARY FOR 

MANAGEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

JUNE 20, 2008 

Available via http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

( 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman 

CARL LEVIN, Michigan 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

BARACK OBAMA, Illinois 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

JON TESTER, Montana 

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine 

TED STEVENS, Alaska 

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio 

NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico 

JOHN WARNER, Virginia 

JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire 

MICHAEL L. ALEXANDER, Staff Director 

KRISTINE V. LAM, Professional Staff Member 

BRANDON L. MILHORN, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

JENNIFER L. TARR, Minority Counsel 

TRINA DRIESSNACK TYRER, Chief Clerk 

PATRICIA R. HOGAN, Publications Clerk and GPO Detailee 

LAURA W. KILBRIDE, Hearing Clerk 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Opening statements: Page 

Senator Akaka .................................................................................................. 1 

Prepared statements: 

Senator Lieberman ........................................................................................... 13 

Senator Voinovich ............................................................................................. 14 

WITNESS 

FRIDAY, JUNE 20, 2008 

Elaine C. Duke to be Under Secretary for Management, U.S. Department 

of Homeland Security: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 3 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 15 

Biographical and professional information ..................................................... 18 

Letter from U.S. Office of Government Ethics ............................................... 30 

Responses to pre-hearing questions ................................................................ 31 

Responses to post-hearing questions .............................................................. 77 

(1) 

NOMINATION OF ELAINE C. DUKE 

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 20, 2008 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY

AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:07 a.m., in room 

342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Daniel K. Akaka, presiding. 

Present: Senator Akaka. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR AKAKA 

Senator AKAKA. This hearing will come to order. Aloha, good 

morning, and welcome to all of you. 

Today, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 

Affairs meets to consider the nomination of Elaine Duke to be 

Under Secretary for Management at the Department of Homeland 

Security (DHS). 

Ms. Duke is a native of Ohio and a graduate of Southern New 

Hampshire University, but most importantly, she received her 

M.B.A. from Chaminade University in Honolulu. So let me say 

aloha pumehana to you and congratulations, Ms. Duke, on your 

nomination. 

Ms. Duke has over 25 years of experience in Federal service. 

Most recently, she has served as Deputy Under Secretary for Management at the Department of Homeland Security, and prior to 

that as Chief Procurement Officer for the Department. I would also 

like to point out that she spent a considerable part of her career 

serving in Hawaii, first at Hickam Air Force Base and subsequently at Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard. The depth of her experience is extraordinary and the Nation is grateful for your service. 

As you know, implementing and transforming the Department of 

Homeland Security has been on the Government Accountability Office’s high-risk list since 2003. I believe that DHS represents the 

most serious management challenge in the Federal Government 

today. That concern, shared also by Senator Voinovich, is one reason why we introduced ‘‘The Effective Homeland Security Management Act,’’ known as S. 547, which would establish a Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security for Management with a term appointment. We have not yet succeeded in that important goal, but we 

were able to strengthen your management authority by designating 

your position as the Chief Management Officer for DHS. 

I want to also commend Ms. Duke and her accomplishments over 

the course of her tenure as the Department’s Chief Procurement 

2 

Officer. Already, you have made significant progress in integrating 

procurement operations across the Department, and equally important, you have recruited new acquisition workforce talent through 

the Acquisition Professional Career Program. I understand that the 

intern program is working and some of the first acquisition interns 

are attending this hearing today. I want to extend my welcome also 

to them. Just having you here makes me feel happy and great. I 

want to congratulate you on being selected for this challenging program and thank you for your service to this country. This is a program that we need to expand. 

However, I remain concerned about the Department’s heavy reliance on outside contractors. As you know, the Department does not 

know how many contractors it currently employs or in what capacity. DHS still struggles to provide sufficient project management 

and oversight, particularly with large acquisitions, such as SBInet. 

I look forward to working closely with you to ensure DHS improves 

its acquisition and builds up its workforce, and I am glad to see 

that you are focused on that issue, as well. 

Ms. Duke, I appreciate your work to make sound management 

practices a priority at DHS. The Department has done an admirable job in assessing the critical skills of its workforce and developing succession plans for the upcoming presidential transition. 

This was not an easy task and continues to be a work in progress. 

But the Department is to be commended for the attention it has 

shown to the importance of strategic planning and comprehensive 

workforce assessment. 

In addition to the short-term transition planning, DHS has a 

long-term workforce challenge as baby boomers retire. DHS must 

attract the next generation of employees equally committed to the 

Department’s mission and with the needed skills. Veterans preference, diversity, and collaboration with unions and employee organizations must be cornerstones of the strategy. In looking at the interns that are present here, I would tell you, as far as diversity is 

concerned, that program certainly is meeting the criteria. I am 

pleased that during your staff interview, you emphasized your 

dedication to diversity recruitment, and it shows. So I look forward 

to hearing more about your plans today. 

A key element of the Department’s recruitment and retention 

strategy must be improving employee morale. Past Federal Human 

Capital Surveys have highlighted systemwide employee problems 

at DHS that must be addressed. As Under Secretary for Management, your duty is to be the voice for strategic human capital management and to ensure that workforce needs are met. I look forward to working with you in this effort. 

I am also pleased that you are willing to continue serving at 

DHS through the presidential transition. As the transition draws 

closer, continuity of leadership is increasingly important. Your long 

career of civil service will provide you the credibility you need 

through the transition, and your management experience will be 

valuable to keeping the Department focused on its mission. If confirmed, I would certainly hope that the next Administration would 

consider keeping you in your position. 

Again, I look forward to working closely with you, and as they 

say in Hawaii, my door will be open to you, to people who work 

3 

1The prepared statement of Ms. Duke appears in the Appendix on page 15. 

with you, and to DHS, as well. And so I thank you very much, and 

again, congratulations. What I witness here today, for me, is such 

a great improvement and it looks good for the future. 

I want to thank you very much for being here, Ms. Duke. I would 

like for you, for the record, to introduce your family. 

TESTIMONY OF ELAINE C. DUKE,1 TO BE UNDER SECRETARY 

FOR MANAGEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

Ms. DUKE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a privilege to be here 

before you as you consider my presidential nomination to be the 

next Under Secretary for Management at the Department of Homeland Security. I have with me here today my husband, Harold Hanson, and my son, Jason. My older son, Brian, is not able to be with 

us, but all three of them have been so supportive throughout my 

career and I thank them this morning. 

I am deeply honored that President Bush has nominated me to 

serve this great country and its people in this capacity. I am grateful to Secretary Chertoff and Deputy Secretary Schneider for all 

the support they have given me to date. 

I would like to thank this Committee and your staff for the 

thoughtful oversight of the Department of Homeland Security and 

your great willingness to work with the Department so effectively 

in protecting our country. If confirmed, I commit that I will continue to work with you and your Committee, other government departments and agencies, businesses large and small, and the public 

to protect the homeland for present and future generations. 

I would also like to acknowledge and extend my appreciation to 

the management staff, many of whom are with me here today, and 

a special thank you to the first class of the DHS Acquisition Professional Career Program interns here today. They are our future, and 

I am very proud to serve with them. 

I consider the Under Secretary for Management a critical position in the Department of Homeland Security and am humbled 

that I am being considered for it. I recognize that this country will 

count on the Under Secretary for Management to ensure continuity 

of mission critical functions through the upcoming change of Administration. I believe that my proven ability to successfully lead, 

manage, and perform the functions of the Department business 

lines has demonstrated I have the skill set and experience to meet 

the challenges of this considerable responsibility. Should I be confirmed, I will bring my passion for good government with me to 

this new position. 

Thank you very much for this opportunity to appear here today, 

and I am happy to answer your questions, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator AKAKA. Well, thank you very much, Ms. Duke. I am sure 

you know now that our Committee rules require that all witnesses 

be under oath, and therefore I ask that you stand and raise your 

right hand. 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 

this Committee is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 

truth, so help you, God? 

4 

1The biographical information of Ms. Duke appears in the Appendix on page 18. 

Ms. DUKE. I do. 

Senator AKAKA. Thank you very much. Let the record note that 

the witness responded in the affirmative. 

Again, I want to welcome you here. You have filed responses to 

a biographical and financial questionnaire, answered pre-hearing 

questions submitted by the Committee, and had your financial 

statements reviewed by the Office of Government Ethics. Without 

objection, this information will be made a part of the hearing 

record, with the exception of the financial data, which are on file 

and available for public inspection in the Committee offices.1

I again thank you for being here and for introducing your family, 

as well. I want to tell you that besides being happy to have you 

here, I can see that you have a lot of strong support with you, and 

certainly you know you have support from here, as well. 

I will begin with the standard questions to you. Is there anything 

you are aware of in your background that might present a conflict 

of interest with the duties of the office to which you have been 

nominated? 

Ms. DUKE. No, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator AKAKA. Do you know of anything, personal or otherwise, 

that would in any way prevent you from fully and honorably discharging the responsibilities of the office to which you have been 

nominated? 

Ms. DUKE. No, sir. 

Senator AKAKA. Do you agree without reservation to respond to 

any reasonable summons to appear and testify before any duly constituted Committee of Congress if you are confirmed? 

Ms. DUKE. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator AKAKA. Thank you very much for your responses. 

Ms. Duke, one issue of great concern to the Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia Subcommittee that I chair is how to attract the next generation of Federal workers. You have demonstrated that already. I 

held a hearing in May on how to improve recruiting and hiring 

practices. Some of the concerns expressed at that hearing were 

agencies who are not taking advantage of e-recruitment tools; agency managers are not engaged in the recruitment process; the hiring 

process takes too long; there is a lack of communication in the recruitment and hiring process; candidates cannot just submit a resume and cover letter to apply for a position; and agencies need to 

invest more in human resource professionals. And again, I repeat 

this came out in that hearing. 

I would appreciate it if you could give your assessment of these 

concerns and how you think DHS should meet this challenge. 

Ms. DUKE. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I agree with you that human capital is our biggest challenge in management, both filling our existing vacancies and planning for succession in the future, since we 

do have a large portion of the Federal workforce retiring in the 

next 5 years. There are several approaches we need to take to this. 

One is better recruiting from the colleges, universities, and also 

Department of Defense (DOD). We have looked at mid-career military leaving. It is a great way to not only attract people with wonVerDate Nov 24 2008 12:16 Dec 30, 2009 Jkt 044119 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\44119.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PAT
5 

derful experience—the non-commissioned officers in the military 

have great leadership experience—but they also bring to us a diverse population who are also veterans, and that is something we 

are very much expanding this year, including building a partnership with Defense and going over to Germany where they are 

outprocessing the military coming out of Afghanistan and Iraq and 

working on placing them right out of DOD. 

So we have started that, but one of the areas I want to work on, 

if confirmed, is doing it more centralized for DHS. Recruiting 

through colleges and Department of Defense is time-intensive, and 

we have to make sure that as we are recruiting, we are recruiting 

for the whole Department, not just pieces of it, so we can draw and 

attract more efficiently the new college graduates and separating 

veterans. 

In terms of workforce, I believe within DHS we have a challenge 

in the Human Capital Office in terms of having the right number 

of people and the right skill set to do the human capital function. 

We have an increase in the President’s budget for the Human Capital Office and this Committee has always been supportive and I 

would ask you for your continued support in that area. 

The Human Capital Office has a huge role not only in leading 

the Department in human capital, but also doing the staffing for 

the 3,000 employees at headquarters, including many of the senior 

executives in the Department, and that is an area we really want 

to make sure we have our career senior executives in place. As you 

may know, we have nearly a 20-percent vacancy rate right now, 

and that is a near-term effort we are focusing on so that we can 

have those employees in place before the election in order to have 

a robust Senior Executive Service (SES) to help us better withstand the transition of our political employees. 

Senator AKAKA. Thank you very much for that. I am glad you 

mentioned about veterans and the military. With that, of course, 

comes a little more maturity and experience that is brought to the 

workplace. Diversity, of course, is another thing that is needed. 

Ms. Duke, you previously mentioned that, if confirmed, you 

would address employee concerns, especially those identified in the 

recent DHS employee survey about communications and performance management. Can you explain in greater detail what you understand employee concerns to be and what actions you would take 

to address them? 

Ms. DUKE. One of the areas in performance that we improved on 

was employees understanding their performance plans, and I think 

in large part that has to do with moving more employees to the 

system that allows them to input into their performance appraisals 

and have clear standards linked to the strategic plan; this is done 

through the ePerformance tool that is online. We have about 20,000 

employees now on that. So they can go online at any time and see 

their performance, the input of their supervisors and input themselves. So we have improved on clarity and understanding. 

The areas that we, I will say, have the most challenge in is satisfaction with pay and appropriately dealing with poor performers. 

Our employees think that we don’t effectively deal with poor performance in the workplace and we have to work on better distinguishing between good performers and good performers in rewards. 

6 

The other area related to your question is employees thinking they 

have a fair rating. 

So what we are doing in this area is we did some looking at why 

this is the case and we did some focus groups with the leaders in 

DHS headquarters and found that we have some basic challenges 

in supervisors knowing how to supervise the Federal workforce. 

And so we are starting with, I will call it Supervision 101 training 

that we will have ready in about a month and actually making sure 

our supervisors know how to appropriately deal with good and poor 

performers in the workplace. Good performers—what type of 

awards and rewards are available for them to use so they can utilize them effectively. And in terms of poor performers, what actions 

should a supervisor take if an employee is either performing poorly 

or has conduct problems so that they actually do take those steps. 

That is one of the actions we are looking at, and I think that is 

going to be a good baseline. 

We have changed our senior executives’ performance plans to 

focus more on being a supervisor as one of their performance elements, everything from managing performance to ethics in leadership to managing diversity, and I think that letting our employees 

know, especially our most senior executives, that really is one of 

their key objectives, not just meeting the mission, is going to really 

set the tone for our Department. 

Senator AKAKA. I authored a provision in the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 establishing a Homeland 

Security Rotation Program for mid-level employees. I know the Department issued a directive on the program last year. I wonder if 

you are aware of it and if you could comment on how it is working. 

Ms. DUKE. It is working, but in pockets right now, and it is 

something that we really should use as a more systemic tool for 

unifying the Department. Some of the areas it is working in is our 

formal programs. Our acquisition interns here today rotate through 

three components to complete their program. They spent a year in 

each of three components. Our fellows and our Executive Leadership Development Program all have rotational assignments. 

But those are pockets of programs and not institutional. The way 

we are working on institutionalizing it is: The President issued an 

Executive Order last fall on the National Security Professional Program and we have identified all of our employees that are National 

Security Professionals at the mid-grades and upper grades. We are 

currently developing policies stating that to be selected in a senior 

executive position that is a national security position, which is virtually all of our senior executive positions, those employees would 

have to have either rotational experience or experience in a joint 

program. And I think that way, it is going to be not just these specialized programs that you are selected with, but really making the 

joint and/or the multiple agency experience a condition to be able 

to effectively lead the Department. 

Where we are on that right now is we have identified the employees and the target positions. We have identified the initial 

training that these employees should have on the national security 

framework. And now the next step is to identify the types of rotational positions we should have, not only within the Department, 

but throughout the Federal Government. 

7 

Senator AKAKA. Diversity of the workforce is an important concern of mine, as I know it is with you. At the Committee’s business 

meeting next week, I hope we will report out the Senior Executive 

Service Diversity Act, which I introduced to help ensure that the 

senior levels of the Federal Government reflect the Nation. And 

also, I am glad to hear what you said about maybe some of the revisions that may be done in the SES level, as well, for better management. 

Could you please elaborate on your efforts and plans to increase 

diversity at the Department? 

Ms. DUKE. Our plans to increase diversity are under two umbrellas. One is to have a career path growth within the Department 

that is more comprehensive. When you look at our diversity numbers, we have much better diversity at the pay grades below 13. We 

have a little less diversity at the 14 and 15 levels. And then we 

are most under-represented in several areas at the Senior Executive Service level. So what we have to do is find out how can we 

grow those diverse candidates that are in the 13 and below and 

make them positioned so they can be very competitive for the 14s, 

15s, and Senior Executive Service. 

So that is one area we are doing. What we are doing in that are 

some of the development programs I already talked about. We are 

going to, by the end of this fiscal year, have an information session 

open to all DHS employees. So if they are in a career field that 

doesn’t have much growth, we are going to talk to them about the 

career fields in DHS that have growth, more senior positions, have 

opportunities so that they can look at maybe—it may require them 

to change career fields, like some of our TSA Officers have changed 

to Border Patrol Agents. But it allows them to know what opportunities are in the Department where there is more growth and higher grade levels. So those are some of the initiatives we are doing 

to growth within. 

Another thing we have done recently is we have added an Equal 

Employment Opportunity representative to our ERC, which is our 

Executive Resources Committee that selects all our senior executives, to make sure that we have a concern for diversity just day 

to day. It is not just an initiative. 

The second area we want to work on is casting the net wider, if 

you will. We have made a concerted effort this year to really look 

at where we are recruiting, to go to areas where we can get more 

diverse candidates. We are advertising in newspapers and periodicals that have a larger minority population, going to historically 

black universities and other minority institutions so we can cast 

the net wider so that we can bring in a more diverse pool of applicants. I think that is the two cures to it, recruiting more broadly 

and then also making sure that we have opportunities for our diverse younger population to grow within the Department. 

Senator AKAKA. In a hearing I held last November, I learned 

that Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers receive as little 

as 2 weeks of on-the-job training following their graduation from 

the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. I understand that 

CBP officers now are hired exclusively through the Federal Career 

Intern Program, which is designed to bring in entry-level employees in fields where a long period of training and development are 

8 

needed. Agencies are responsible for providing at least 2 years of 

formal training under the program. How do you justify using the 

Career Intern Program to hire these employees? 

Ms. DUKE. That is an issue that was just brought to my attention 

earlier this week. The way Border Patrol is hiring its Border Patrol 

agents right now is they usually start at the 5 or 7 level, and then 

their journeyman level is an 11. So they are hired as 5, 7, 9, 11, 

which with successful performance they would graduate at the 11 

level. 

We are now hiring them with an exam that has been accredited. 

The one piece I will work on for you and this Committee is making 

sure that while they are hired through the intern program and are 

in a development program pay grade-wise, that they actually are 

getting the aspects of an internship, which means on-the-job and 

formal training so that it really is an intern program, and I commit 

to you to continue looking at that and seeing if that authority is 

being appropriately used. 

I will say, though, that right now, with the huge hiring effort in 

Border Patrol, we are now making initial job offers to all applicants 

that do pass the exam. Now, again, that is a conditional job offer. 

They still have to go through security and other checks. So we are 

capturing the veteran and the diverse population. But we do have 

to make sure that the intern piece of the program is built in. 

Senator AKAKA. I have been looking into ways to speed up the 

Federal hiring process and during our recent hearing I was really 

amazed at what is in the process now and why it takes so long to 

hire anyone. However, it appears that DHS may hold a record. It 

takes 6 to 8 months to hire Border Patrol agents and CBP officers. 

Why does it take so long and what do you plan to do to speed up 

the process? 

Ms. DUKE. This is one of our biggest challenges, I agree with you, 

Mr. Chairman. Two pieces of the hiring process. One is the HR, or 

bringing the person through the selection process. The second is 

the security process. What we are doing to try to streamline the 

hiring process is to take advantage of all the flexibilities we have. 

We have direct hire under a few of the critical career fields, not as 

many as we would like, but where we do have it, we have to make 

sure we are taking advantage of it, in the intelligence area, acquisition, and information security specialists. 

One of the things we suffer from is, I think, because we are a 

new department, hiring should be a repeatable process. It should 

be very regular. We don’t have that yet, and that is something we 

are developing. We just implemented, about 2 weeks ago, a process 

where we look at every step of the human resources piece of the 

process and target days to get people through the different stages 

of the process, and that is, I think, going to be key. It is a very 

elementary step, but it is going to be important to measure our 

human resources people performance against each step of the HR 

process. 

The second area where we have had challenges is getting security clearances. Every one of our employees have to go through 

clearance and suitability. In the Federal Government, there is reciprocity of clearances, so if somebody already has a clearance, we 

do accept it. We have not to date had any reciprocity of suitability, 

9 

so even if someone is moving from, say, an employee to a contractor 

or a contractor to employee within DHS, they have to go through 

the suitability process again. That is something that we are looking 

at and trying first to build reciprocity within the Department. 

And then we are also on a Federal working group to look at how 

can we have reciprocity of suitability at least in some of the major 

career fields. There might be certain ones, like intelligence officers, 

where you might want to specifically look at them again. But we 

do have support from Charlie Allen, who is our Under Secretary for 

Intelligence and Analysis. So I think that the reciprocity of security 

clearances and suitability is going to really shorten that process, 

too. 

Senator AKAKA. Ms. Duke, the Government Accountability Office 

has often commented on DHS’s over-reliance on contractors. Secretary Chertoff testified earlier this year that the Department 

plans to convert several contractor-held positions to career over the 

next fiscal year. Can you tell us which positions are an especially 

high priority for in-sourcing and how many you anticipate converting? 

Ms. DUKE. The biggest area we are converting—this is more of 

a problem for headquarters, the non-Gang of Seven. Within TSA, 

CBP, FEMA, those components that came into DHS, it is not as 

much of an issue. I think where the most risk is some of the headquarters departments, where we grew so quickly, there wasn’t an 

anticipation in our budget that we would be 3,000 people and have 

the mission, and so that is the biggest challenge. 

The area where we are converting most of the positions this year 

is the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD). 

There are two areas we are looking at building. One is where we 

don’t have the corporate knowledge or the subject matter expertise 

within the Department to really drive the mission forward. Some 

of the critical areas are critical infrastructure, cyber security. And 

then the second area is where we don’t have enough Federal employees to appropriately manage the contracts. I would put both of 

those into the category that this Committee called inherently governmental services, and the NPPD has nearly 300 positions that 

they are currently filling under Federal employees rather than contractors. 

Some other areas we are looking at is in Intelligence and Analysis (I&A). We are looking at lessening our reliance on intelligence 

officers. That is a really hard area to recruit, but we are redoubling 

our efforts, and I am meeting weekly with Charlie Allen, the Under 

Secretary, to try to improve our efforts there. He has a hard competition because he is competing against CIA and FBI and some 

very great agencies. 

The other area we are working on is some areas in management. 

We have certain areas in security where we have our counterintelligence and other areas, and some of the areas in information technology where we want to have a little more robust workforce so 

that we make sure that we do have the core competencies within 

our Federal employees. 

So altogether, there are about 400 positions in headquarters that 

we are targeting for this year. 

10 

Senator AKAKA. Ms. Duke, as I said in my opening statement, 

one project underway at DHS continues to cause concern and that 

is the SBInet. While Congress has been informed that DHS did not 

pay anything over the $20 million cap on Project 28 (P–28), I remain concerned about the delivery delays and software problems. 

We have been told that work may begin soon on securing the 

Northern border under the same SBInet contract with Boeing. 

Given the numerous concerns over the SBInet contract and the 

significant differences between the Northern and Southern border, 

could you see a scenario in which you might want to issue a separate request for proposals for the Northern border? 

Ms. DUKE. I think there are many pieces of securing the border 

that we will not do under the Boeing contract. We are not doing 

the fence on the Southern border. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles 

(UAVs) are going to be a large part in the current plan of securing 

the Northern border because of the threat and the terrain. Those 

are not going to be bought under the SBInet contract with Boeing. 

So there are many areas, both on the Southern and Northern border, that are not appropriate for the Boeing contract. 

Each time we have a new task, the program office is responsible 

for doing a cost-benefit analysis and looking at whether that specific task should be bought under the Boeing contract or not, so 

that is a requirement we have imposed and the program office is 

required to do and we are overseeing. 

In terms specifically of the P–28, the main issue on P–28 was the 

Common Operating Picture (COP), the software. The challenges 

under that were driven by—I think we underestimated the complexity of integrating commercial elements. So going in, both the 

government and Boeing thought that we were buying already commercially proven technology, all we are going to do is integrate it, 

and that would be easy, and that is what the P–28 demonstration 

project did prove to be incorrect. It did show us that the integration 

piece is difficult and it is important. 

How we are dealing with that is we are working on building the 

pieces demonstrated in P–28 into what we call the 0.5 version of 

the Common Operating Picture. That will be tested before it is deployed, and then the eventual delivery of a Common Operating Picture will be the 1.0, the fully operational version, meeting CBP’s 

full operational requirements. 

One of the things we are doing as part of this process is we have 

Lincoln Laboratories, an independent federally funded research 

and development center, looking at the alternatives to our Common 

Operating Picture. So Lincoln Labs—and it is supposed to be done, 

I believe in about a month—is looking at not only the COP that 

we are developing to 0.5, but also looking at other alternatives of 

commercially available software or some being used proprietary in 

DOD and making sure that before we deploy to the Northern border, or more on the Southern border, for that matter, that we have 

the right software choice. 

So I do share your concerns, Mr. Chairman, on slowing down, but 

I also think it is important to get the COP right. That is the heart. 

That is how the Border Patrol is going to command and control incidents and that is a key piece of the system and we have to get 

it right, and I believe that until we have manageable risk on techVerDate Nov 24 2008 12:16 Dec 30, 2009 Jkt 044119 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\44119.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PAT
11 

nology, we might have to, as we have done this fiscal year, just 

deal with a little bit of schedule slippage. 

Senator AKAKA. Ms. Duke, when Deputy Secretary Paul Schneider was the Under Secretary for Management, he also held the role 

of Chief Acquisition Officer. If confirmed, could you explain how 

you see acquisition authorities and responsibilities being managed? 

Ms. DUKE. Yes. If confirmed, I would be the Department’s Chief 

Acquisition Officer. One of the biggest initiatives I started when I 

was the Chief Procurement Officer and would really drive as the 

Chief Acquisition Officer is to make sure that we are managing acquisition as a system. When the Department was set up, the Chief 

Procurement Officer had authority over procurement, which is really just the business piece. If you flow-chart out the acquisition process, awarding the contract is at the tail end of a process that could 

be years, and that is what the Under Secretary of Management 

through the Chief Procurement Officer had authority for. 

What we have done is we have grown that functional authority 

to the entire acquisition process, and what I mean by that is not 

just the business deal, the contract piece, but program management, test and evaluation, systems engineering, all the elements 

that really make a good program. This Committee has recognized 

that one of our major problems in acquisition is good requirements. 

We need those good requirements up front out of the Program Office. You can’t build those in at the end of the process in a contract. 

What I would do as the Chief Acquisition Officer, if confirmed, 

is continue to build that authority. We have gone out and asked 

each component to have a single point of contact that would be the 

accountable person for acquisition in each of the components that 

has major programs. So I think that would take the Chief Acquisition Officer of the Department and give that person accountable 

contacts within each of the major components to make the focus. 

The other big area that I think is going to drive acquisition improvements is our focus on program managers, making sure that 

they are certified and making sure that they have managed the 

program cost schedule and performance as their performance evaluation criteria. 

Senator AKAKA. When GAO reported to Congress on its high-risk 

list last year, it said this about DHS, ‘‘DHS has not linked its goals 

to resource requirements in its strategic plan and does not involve 

all stakeholders in its strategic planning process. Moreover, DHS 

lacks not only a comprehensive strategy with overall goals and a 

time line, but also a dedicated management integration team to 

support its management integration efforts.’’ 

Could you comment on what steps the Department has taken to 

address these issues raised by GAO and what more needs to be 

done to correct this problem? 

Ms. DUKE. Well, we have developed corrective action plans for 

each of the areas in the GAO report, and each of those corrective 

action plans is focused on the area, the flood program, those type 

of things, and those corrective action plans do have milestones and 

deliverables required to drive the program off the high-risk list. 

The other thing we are doing in terms of the strategic plan is the 

Department has decided—the strategic plan is managed by Assistant Secretary Stew Baker. We have met with Deputy Secretary 

12 

Schneider and we are going to put the performance objectives in 

the strategic plan as recommended by GAO. You may know that 

we did have a strategic plan that we sent to OMB and it was rejected because it did not have the goals, just like GAO said. So we 

are in the process of putting the goals in the strategic plan. We are 

meeting with all the stakeholders. We have three of the five goals 

done, and we would expect to have that plan very soon. It will definitely be this summer. 

Senator AKAKA. Well, I really thank you for your responses. 

There are no further questions at this time, Ms. Duke, but there 

may be additional questions for the record which we will submit to 

you in writing. The hearing record will remain open until the close 

of business today for Members of this Committee to submit additional statements or questions. Your full statement will also be included in the record. 

I know you are anxious for your nomination to move forward. It 

is my hope that the Committee will vote on it in the near future 

and that your nomination will be considered expeditiously in the 

full Senate. I want to tell you that I will do all I can to bring that 

about as soon as we can. I look upon your nomination as one that 

we need. 

I thank you so much for your responses. Your responses show 

your experience and that you understand the problems that we 

need to work on and that we need to work on those problems together and as quickly as we can, because DHS, as you know, is a 

huge Department. It has the critical mission of protecting the security of our country, so we need to work on it as quickly as possible. 

Again, I want to thank you. It is good to meet your family and 

your interns here, as well as others who are supporting you in your 

position. So thank you again. 

Ms. DUKE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator AKAKA. Aloha and best wishes. This hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 10:53 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(13) 

A P P E N D I X 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR LIEBERMAN 

I am pleased to support Elaine Duke’s nomination as Under Secretary for Management at the Department of Homeland Security and I also want to take this opportunity to commend her for her more than quarter of a century in public service. 

Thomas Jefferson once said that: ‘‘A nation that rests on the will of the people 

must also depend on individuals to support its institutions in whatever ways are 

appropriate if it is to flourish. Persons qualified for public office should feel some 

obligation to make that contribution.’’ 

Ms. Duke has chosen to make that contribution in one of the most underappreciated but, in the end, vitally important areas of government service—contracting 

and procurement—making sure the taxpayers are getting their money’s worth for 

each from every dollar of government spending. 

Until joining DHS, Ms. Duke’s career spanned the breadth of government and the 

width of our nation—from Charleston, S.C., to Hawaii to Washington with stints in 

the Air Force, the Navy, the Railroad Administration and the Smithsonian Institute. 

At DHS, Ms. Duke has been part of the team charged with the daunting mission 

of merging 22 separate federal agencies with different missions, procedures and cultures into one effective agency dedicated to preparation and response to disasters 

whether natural or at the hands of our terrorist enemies. 

Of course there have been problems. 

Some of the Department’s largest acquisition programs—Deepwater, SBInet, and 

radiation detection portal monitors—have also been the most troubled and need better leadership. 

Also, the Department’s heavy reliance on contractors to perform basic services 

raises serious questions about whether DHS is building sufficient internal capacity 

and institutional knowledge. DHS still has insufficient capacity to develop requirements and evaluate the technical feasibility of contractors’ proposals. 

In addition, the remainder of this year the Department must take great care to 

ensure that it is prepared for the transition to a new Administration—the first time 

DHS will have been faced with this challenge. Historically, terrorists have viewed 

governmental transitions as a time of vulnerability, and I know Ms. Duke and other 

leaders in the Department are working hard to make sure that a smooth transition 

occurs. 

I look forward to working with Ms. Duke on these and other issues going forward. 

Ms. Duke herself spoke of the enormity of the task DHS faces in an interview 

where she said: ‘‘The geographic footprint [of DHS] is worldwide. We have about 

208,000 employees, and the budget for Fiscal Year 2007 was $42.8 billion. The organizational structure is made up of a headquarters with both the traditional headquarters activities and four distinct directorates with operational focus. That’s the 

National Preparedness Directorate, Science and Technology, the Under Secretary of 

Management, and FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency]. We also have 

six operational components: the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Secret Service, U.S. Customs and Immigration 

Service, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, and the United States Coast 

Guard.’’ 

She went on to say: ‘‘I think that the focus is on how you bring people together, 

how you stay focused on a solution, how you cut through obstacles and know when 

enough talking is enough and when it’s time to make a decision.’’ 

Our Nation is lucky to have women and men of Ms. Duke’s dedication who are 

ready to answer Jefferson’s centuries old call to duty and use her talents to make 

her special contribution. 

14 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR VOINOVICH 

Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Collins, I commend you both for convening 

today’s hearing to consider the nomination of Elaine Duke to be the Department of 

Homeland Security’s (DHS) Under Secretary for Management. 

A strong Under Secretary for Management at DHS is imperative because the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002 combined 22 agencies and 180,000 employees into 

a new entity. This effort amounted to the federal government’s largest restructuring 

since the creation of the Department of Defense in 1947. In 2003, the Government 

Accountability Office (GAO) noted issues with this restructuring, and while progress 

has been made, implementing and transforming DHS remains on GAO’s 2007 highrisk list of programs susceptible to waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement. 

As the former Chairman and now Ranking Member of this Committee’s Oversight 

of Government Management Subcommittee, I take GAO’s concerns seriously and am 

committed to ensuring that the Department of Homeland Security has the proper 

management structure. That is why last year I included language in the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 that clarifies that 

the Under Secretary for Management is the Chief Management Officer and principal advisor to the Secretary on the management of DHS and has responsibility for 

DHS’s strategic management and annual performance planning, the identification 

and tracking of performance measures, and the integration and transformation process in support of homeland security operations and programs. The Implementing 

Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 also sets qualification standards for the Under Secretary of Management, requiring that the nominee have extensive management experience, leadership skills, a demonstrated ability to manage 

and a proven record. 

I believe Elaine Duke has these qualifications, and I am pleased to support her 

nomination as Under Secretary for Management of DHS. Ms. Duke, who grew up 

in my home state of Ohio, has been with DHS since its creation in 2002 and has 

served in various leadership roles including as the Department’s Chief Procurement 

Officer and Deputy Under Secretary for Management. I believe this prior service 

has equipped her with the skill set necessary to serve as DHS’s Under Secretary 

for Management. 

As we consider this nomination for DHS’s first Under Secretary for Management, 

I think it is an opportune time to raise two ways that I think we can continue to 

improve DHS’s management structure. 

First, I remain convinced that the Under Secretary for Management should serve 

a fixed five year term. Such a term would provide management continuity at DHS 

during times of leadership transition. The need for such continuity is clearly apparent today because we are only six months away from the largest leadership transition DHS has ever faced, when a new President will appoint entirely new leadership. As that new leadership is vetted and confirmed, I think it is of the utmost 

importance that management with institutional knowledge remains in place at DHS 

to oversee the Department’s expenditure of funds, procurement activities and 

human resources. 

Second, I remain concerned about the management of DHS’s procurement programs. In 2005, the DHS’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) noted vulnerabilities 

with DHS’s procurement management. The OIG pointed out that DHS has a Chief 

Procurement Officer as well as seven procurement offices that were transferred to 

DHS with their legacy agencies. I question whether maintaining multiple procurement offices in a Department that purchases billions of dollars worth of goods and 

services each year is the best and wisest way to manage our resources and oversee 

procurement activities. 

Mr. Chairman, in announcing GAO’s 2007 high-risk list, Comptroller General 

Walker stated an ‘‘array of management and programmatic challenges continues to 

limit DHS’s ability to carry out its roles under the National Homeland Security 

Strategy in an effective risk-based way.’’ I believe Elaine Duke’s nomination is an 

important step towards addressing the management and programmatic challenges 

DHS continues to face, and I am proud to support her nomination today. Thank you 

for calling today’s hearing. 

15 


44119.001
16 


44119.002
17 


44119.003
18 


44119.004
19 


44119.005
20 


44119.006
21 


44119.007
22 


44119.008
23 


44119.009
24 


44119.010
25 


44119.011
26 


44119.012
27 


44119.013
28 


44119.014
29 


44119.015
30 


44119.016
31 


44119.017
32 


44119.018
33 


44119.019
34 


44119.020
35 


44119.021
36 


44119.022
37 


44119.023
38 


44119.024
39 


44119.025
40 


44119.026
41 


44119.027
42 


44119.028
43 


44119.029
44 


44119.030
45 


44119.031
46 


44119.032
47 


44119.033
48 


44119.034
49 


44119.035
50 


44119.036
51 


44119.037
52 


44119.038
53 


44119.039
54 


44119.040
55 


44119.041
56 


44119.042
57 


44119.043
58 


44119.044
59 


44119.045
60 


44119.046
61 


44119.047
62 


44119.048
63 


44119.049
64 


44119.050
65 


44119.051
66 


44119.052
67 


44119.053
68 


44119.054
69 


44119.055
70 


44119.056
71 


44119.057
72 


44119.058
73 


44119.059
74 


44119.060
75 


44119.061
76 


44119.062
77 


44119.063
78 


44119.064
79 


44119.065
80 


44119.066
81 


44119.067
82 


44119.068
83 


44119.069
84 


44119.070
85 


44119.071
86 


44119.072
87 

Æ 


44119.073