Kelly Ayotte

The Senate Armed Services Committee last year directed the Secretary of the Army to report to this committee.

Does DOD have guidance or regulations in place that ensure leases that include capital improvements are properly reviewed and funded, and that the required notifications are submitted to Congress?

Secretary Pfannenstiel, would you agree that the Navy's four public shipyards are critical in maintaining fleet readiness and supporting ongoing operations worldwide?

DOD revised and strengthened facility standards for anti-terrorism and force protection (AT/FP).

With everything else our military members and their families have to contend with, they should not have to worry about the safety and security of their kids in homes provided by the military.

Pease Air National Guard Base in New Hampshire would be an ideal location for the stationing of the new tanker.

With workforce safety, health, and quality of life as top priorities, the Navy develops comprehensive restoration and modernization (RM) projects.

Secretary Pfannenstiel, why is this not part of the Navy's efficiencies initiatives and included in the budget request for 2012?

It's not that the Navy doesn't care about shipyards, but it seems like the ones in Virginia and Hawaii have been getting a lot more attention in budget requests.

One of the issues I just hope you will address is, given the unrest there, whether it makes sense to invest that money right now, until we know what the outcome is going to be.

I think that makes sense, if we can--assuming we move--once we move forward with the full appropriation for this fiscal year--please know that we're very concerned about that, as well--but, that you would consider moving that up.

I would just ask that this clearly become a merit-based decisionmaking that looks strategically at what makes sense and be the most cost-efficient use of taxpayer funds.

I know that you're in the process of coming up with the criteria for strategic basing of where the KC-46A will be stationed.

I also have the privilege of serving on the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee that oversees transportation funding, and so I'm concerned that it's going to be a drain on your priorities.

In recent years, a proliferation of earmark grants have been appropriated to DOD through the Office of Economic Adjustment (OEA) for vague general requirements.

Non-Defense projects should be funded by other Federal, State, or local agencies.

But when you're given the legal language for--or the language in the bill itself, it seems like it is a way to circumvent what has been actually a decision of Congress, right now, on earmarks.

In conjunction with finding that new site, is the plan to actually construct a new Reserve Center in an alternative site?

I fully support the Secretary of Defense's initiatives to spend each Defense dollar wisely and only on critical military priorities.

The national debt is a threat to our national security.

Catch limits and sectors established by NOAA for the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan represent significant obstacles for the fishing industry in New Hampshire.

Fishermen are the first line of defense in protecting our marine resources.

I just wanted to follow up with the House bill and the language in it to clarify with you that the funding for the Memorial Bridge is actually TIGER II competitive grant funding.

Can I have your commitment to expedite the review process within the Department of Transportation?

As I understand it, the NEPA review that was already approved--the one that has been resubmitted is very substantially similar, very few differences between the two.