Report on the Activities of the Committee on Armed Services, 116th Congress: House Report 116-709
Summary
House Report 116-709 of the 116th Congress, 2d Session, Union Calendar No. 593, dated December 31, 2020, on the activities of the Committee on Armed Services for the One Hundred Sixteenth Congress. The roster names Adam Smith of Washington as Chairman. A closing list of press releases includes a 12/8/20 Smith statement on the passage of the FY21 NDAA Conference Report, a 12/19/20 item in which Smith warns Pentagon leadership against severing the dual-hat relationship between the National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command, and a 12/21/20 item in which Smith, Maloney and labor leaders urge President Trump to sign the FY21 National Defense Authorization Act into law.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
- Issuer
- Congressional materials
- Document type
- Crpt Crpt 116Hrpt709 Crpt 116Hrpt709
- Case
- Crpt Crpt 116Hrpt709 Crpt 116Hrpt709
Cite this document
“Report on the Activities of the Committee on Armed Services, 116th Congress: House Report 116-709.”
Original at www.govinfo.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/crpt-crpt-116hrpt709-crpt-116hrpt709/
, SHA-256 b33bef3419f8f05e50f61a4e9a0604edc659c6445cbf195559d265bd54335433.Full text
1
Union Calendar No. 593
116th Congress, 2d Session – – – – – – – – – – – – House Report 116–709
REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
FOR THE
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
DECEMBER 31, 2020.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
42–828 WASHINGTON : 2021
E:\Seals\Congress.#13
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4012 Sfmt 4012 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
ADAM SMITH, Washington, Chairman
SUSAN A. DAVIS, California WILLIAM M. ‘‘MAC’’ THORNBERRY, Texas
JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island JOE WILSON, South Carolina
RICK LARSEN, Washington ROB BISHOP, Utah
JIM COOPER, Tennessee MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio
JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut MIKE ROGERS, Alabama
JOHN GARAMENDI, California K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas
JACKIE SPEIER, California DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado
TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia
DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri
RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia
SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts MO BROOKS, Alabama
SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California BRADLEY BYRNE, Alabama
ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland, Vice SAM GRAVES, Missouri
Chair ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York
RO KHANNA, California SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee
WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana
FILEMON VELA, Texas TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
ANDY KIM, New Jersey MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin
KENDRA S. HORN, Oklahoma MATT GAETZ, Florida
GILBERT RAY CISNEROS, Jr., California DON BACON, Nebraska
CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania JIM BANKS, Indiana
JASON CROW, Colorado LIZ CHENEY, Wyoming
XOCHITL TORRES SMALL, New Mexico JACK BERGMAN, Michigan
ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey (Vacancy)
VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas (Vacancy)
DEBRA A. HAALAND, New Mexico
JARED F. GOLDEN, Maine
LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts
ELAINE G. LURIA, Virginia
ANTHONY BRINDISI, New York
PAUL ARCANGELI, Staff Director
ZACH STEACY, Director, Legislative Operations
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
(II)
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES,
Washington, DC, December 31, 2020.
Hon. CHERYL L. JOHNSON,
Clerk of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
DEAR MS. JOHNSON: Pursuant to clause 1(d) of rule XI of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, I present herewith the re-
port on the activities of the Committee on Armed Services for the
116th Congress.
Sincerely,
ADAM SMITH, Chairman.
(III)
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 7633 Sfmt 7633 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 7633 Sfmt 7633 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
CONTENTS
Page
Powers and Duties ................................................................................................... 1
Committee Rules ...................................................................................................... 4
Composition of the Committee on Armed Services ............................................... 17
Committee Staff ....................................................................................................... 21
Committee Meetings and Hearings ........................................................................ 23
Legislative Activities ............................................................................................... 23
Oversight Activities ................................................................................................. 29
Publications .............................................................................................................. 101
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
(V)
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
Union Calendar No. 593
116TH CONGRESS REPORT
" HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES !
2d Session 116–709
REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON
ARMED SERVICES FOR THE 116TH CONGRESS
DECEMBER 31, 2020.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State
of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. SMITH, from the Committee on Armed Services,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
POWERS AND DUTIES
Background
The House Committee on Armed Services, a standing committee
of Congress, was established on January 2, 1947, as a part of the
Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), by merging
the Committees on Military Affairs and Naval Affairs. The Com-
mittees on Military Affairs and Naval Affairs were established in
1882. In 1885, jurisdiction over military and naval appropriations
was taken from the Committee on Appropriations and given to the
Committees on Military Affairs and Naval Affairs, respectively.
This practice continued until July 1, 1920, when jurisdiction over
all appropriations was again placed in the Committee on Appro-
priations.
In the 93rd Congress, following a study by the House Select
Committee on Committees, the House passed H. Res. 988, the
Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, to be effective January 3,
1975. As a result of those amendments, the jurisdictional areas of
the Committee on Armed Services remained essentially unchanged.
However, oversight functions were amended to require each stand-
ing committee to review and study on a continuing basis all mat-
ters and jurisdiction of the committee. Also, the Committee on
Armed Services was to review and study on a continuing basis all
laws, programs, and Government activities dealing with or involv-
ing international arms control and disarmament and the education
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
of military dependents in school.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
2
The rules changes adopted by the House (H. Res. 5) on January
4, 1977, placed new responsibilities in the field of atomic energy in
the Committee on Armed Services. Those responsibilities involved
the national security aspects of atomic energy previously within the
jurisdiction of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. Public Law
95–110, effective September 20, 1977, abolished the Joint Com-
mittee on Atomic Energy.
With the adoption of H. Res. 658 on July 14, 1977, which estab-
lished the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the
jurisdiction of the Committee on Armed Service over intelligence
matters was changed. That resolution gave the Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence oversight responsibilities for intelligence
and intelligence-related activities and programs of the U.S. Govern-
ment. Specifically, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
has exclusive legislative jurisdiction regarding the Central Intel-
ligence Agency and the director of Central Intelligence, including
authorizations. Also, legislative jurisdiction over all intelligence
and intelligence-related activities and programs was vested in the
permanent select committee except that other committees with a
jurisdictional interest may request consideration of any such mat-
ters. Accordingly, as a matter of practice, the Committee on Armed
Services shared jurisdiction over the authorization process involv-
ing intelligence-related activities.
The committee continues to have shared jurisdiction over mili-
tary intelligence activities as set forth in rule X of the Rules of the
House of Representatives.
With the adoption of House rules (H. Res. 5) on January 4, 1995,
the Committee on National Security was established as the suc-
cessor committee to the Committee on Armed Services, and was
granted additional legislative and oversight authority over mer-
chant marine academies, national security aspects of merchant ma-
rine policy and programs, and interoceanic canals. Rules for the
104th Congress also codified the existing jurisdiction of the com-
mittee over tactical intelligence matters and the intelligence re-
lated activities of the Department of Defense.
On January 6, 1999, the House adopted H. Res. 5, rules for the
106th Congress, in which the Committee on National Security was
redesignated as the Committee on Armed Services.
On January 5, 2012, the House adopted H. Res. 5, rules for the
112th Congress, which clarified the Committee on Armed Services
jurisdiction over Department of Defense administered cemeteries.
Constitutional Powers and Duties
The powers and duties of Congress in relation to national defense
matters stem from Article I, section 8 of the United States Con-
stitution, which provides, among other things that Congress shall
have power:
To raise and support Armies;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make rules for the Government and Regulation of the land
and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia;
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia,
and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the
Service of the United States;
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
3
To exercise exclusive Legislation . . . over all Places purchased
. . . for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards,
and other needful Buildings; and
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for car-
rying into Execution the foregoing Powers.
House Rules on Jurisdiction
Rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives established
the jurisdiction and related functions for each standing committee.
Under the rule, all bills, resolutions, and other matters relating to
subjects within the jurisdiction of any standing committee shall be
referred to such committee. The jurisdiction of the House Com-
mittee on Armed Services, pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule X is as
follows:
(1) Ammunition depots; forts; arsenals; and Army, Navy, and Air
Force reservations and establishments.
(2) Common defense generally.
(3) Conservation, development, and use of naval petroleum and
oil shale reserves.
(4) The Department of Defense generally, including the Depart-
ments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, generally.
(5) Interoceanic canals generally, including measures relating to
the maintenance, operation, and administration of interoceanic ca-
nals.
(6) Merchant Marine Academy and State Maritime Academies.
(7) Military applications of nuclear energy.
(8) Tactical intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the
Department of Defense.
(9) National security aspects of merchant marine, including fi-
nancial assistance for the construction and operation of vessels,
maintenance of the U.S. shipbuilding and ship repair industrial
base, cabotage, cargo preference, and merchant marine officers and
seamen as these matters relate to the national security.
(10) Pay, promotion, retirement, and other benefits and privi-
leges of members of the Armed Forces.
(11) Scientific research and development in support of the armed
services.
(12) Selective service.
(13) Size and composition of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and
Air Force.
(14) Soldiers’ and sailors’ homes.
(15) Strategic and critical materials necessary for the common
defense.
(16) Cemeteries administered by the Department of Defense.
In addition to its legislative jurisdiction and general oversight
function, the Committee on Armed Services has special oversight
functions with respect to international arms control and disar-
mament and the education of military dependents in schools.
Investigative Authority and Legislative Oversight
H. Res. 988 of the 93rd Congress, the Committee Reform Amend-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
ments of 1974, amended clause 1(b) of rule XI of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, to provide general authority for each
committee to investigate matters within its jurisdiction. That
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
4
amendment established a permanent investigative authority and
relieved the committee of the former requirement of obtaining a re-
newal of the investigative authority by a House resolution at the
beginning of each Congress. H. Res. 988 also amended rule X of the
Rules of the House of Representatives by requiring, as previously
indicated, that standing committees are to conduct legislative over-
sight in the area of their respective jurisdiction, and by estab-
lishing specific oversight functions for the Committee on Armed
Services.
The committee derives its authority to conduct oversight from,
among other things, clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the
House of Representatives (relating to general oversight responsibil-
ities), clause 3(b) of rule X (relating to special oversight functions),
and clause 1(b) of rule XI (relating to investigations and studies).
COMMITTEE RULES
The committee held its organizational meeting on January 24,
2019, and adopted the following rules governing rules and proce-
dure for oversight hearings conducted by the full committee and its
subcommittees. (H.A.S.C. 116–1; Committee Print No. 1)
RULE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
(a) The Rules of the House of Representatives are the rules of the
Committee on Armed Services (hereinafter referred to in these
rules as the ‘‘Committee’’) and its subcommittees so far as applica-
ble.
(b) Pursuant to clause 2(a)(2) of rule XI of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, the Committee’s rules shall be publicly avail-
able in electronic form and published in the Congressional Record
not later than 60 days after the chair of the committee is elected
in each odd-numbered year.
RULE 2. FULL COMMITTEE MEETING DATE
(a) The Committee shall meet every Wednesday at 10:00 a.m.,
when the House of Representatives is in session, and at such other
times as may be fixed by the Chairman of the Committee (herein-
after referred to as the ‘‘Chairman’’), or by written request of mem-
bers of the Committee pursuant to clause 2(c) of rule XI of the
Rules of the House of Representatives.
(b) A Wednesday meeting of the Committee may be dispensed
with by the Chairman, but such action may be reversed by a writ-
ten request of a majority of the members of the Committee.
RULE 3. SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING DATES
Each subcommittee is authorized to meet, hold hearings, receive
evidence, and report to the Committee on all matters referred to
it. Insofar as possible, meetings of the Committee and its sub-
committees shall not conflict. A subcommittee chairman shall set
meeting dates after consultation with the Chairman, other sub-
committee chairmen, and the ranking minority member of the sub-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
committee with a view toward avoiding, whenever possible, simul-
taneous scheduling of Committee and subcommittee meetings or
hearings.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
5
RULE 4. JURISDICTION AND MEMBERSHIP OF COMMITTEE
AND SUBCOMMITTEES
(a) Jurisdiction
(1) The Committee retains jurisdiction of all subjects listed in
clause 1(c) and clause 3(b) of rule X of the Rules of the House of
Representatives and retains exclusive jurisdiction for: defense pol-
icy generally, ongoing military operations, the organization and re-
form of the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy,
counter-drug programs, security cooperation and humanitarian as-
sistance activities (except special operations-related activities) of
the Department of Defense, acquisition and industrial base policy,
technology transfer and export controls, joint interoperability, de-
tainee affairs and policy, force protection policy, and inter-agency
reform as it pertains to the Department of Defense and the nuclear
weapons programs of the Department of Energy. While subcommit-
tees are provided jurisdictional responsibilities in subparagraph
(a)(2) and are required to conduct oversight in their respective ju-
risdictions, pursuant to clause 2(b)(2) of rule X of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee retains the right to exer-
cise oversight and legislative jurisdiction over all subjects within
its purview under rule X of the Rules of the House of Representa-
tives.
(2) The Committee shall be organized to consist of six standing
subcommittees with the following jurisdictions:
Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces: Army programs
and accounts related to aircraft, ground equipment, missiles, am-
munition, and other procurement; Marine Corps programs and ac-
counts related to ground and amphibious equipment, fighter air-
craft, helicopters, air-launched weapons, and ammunition; Air
Force programs and accounts related to fighter, training, reconnais-
sance and surveillance, and electronic warfare aircraft, helicopters,
air-launched weapons, ground equipment, and ammunition; Navy
programs and accounts related to fighter, training, and electronic
warfare aircraft, helicopters, and air-launched weapons; tactical air
and missile defense programs and accounts; chemical agent and
munition destruction programs and accounts; and National Guard
and Reserve equipment programs and accounts.
Subcommittee on Military Personnel: Department of Defense pol-
icy and programs and accounts related to military personnel and
their families, Reserve Component integration and employment,
military health care, military education, dependent schools, POW/
MIA issues, Morale, Welfare and Recreation, commissaries, ceme-
teries under the jurisdiction of the Department of Defense, the Uni-
form Code of Military Justice, and military retirement issues.
Subcommittee on Readiness: Department of Defense policy and
programs and accounts related to military readiness, training, lo-
gistics and maintenance, military construction, organic industrial
base, the civilian and contract workforce, environment, military in-
stallations and real property management, family housing, base re-
alignments and closures, and energy.
Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces: Navy and Ma-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
rine Corps acquisition programs and accounts related to ship-
building and conversion, reconnaissance and surveillance, tanker,
and airlift aircraft, ship and submarine-launched weapons, ammu-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
6
nition, and other procurements; Air Force programs and accounts
related to bomber, tanker, and airlift aircraft; Army programs and
accounts related to waterborne vessels; and Maritime policy and
programs and accounts under the jurisdiction of the Committee as
delineated in paragraphs 5 and 9 of clause 1(c) of rule X of the
Rules of the House of Representatives.
Subcommittee on Strategic Forces: Department of Defense and
Department of Energy policy related to strategic deterrence, stra-
tegic stability, nuclear weapons, strategic and nuclear arms control,
nonproliferation, nuclear safety, missile defense, and space; Depart-
ment of Defense programs and accounts related to nuclear weap-
ons, strategic missiles, nuclear command and control systems, De-
partment of Defense intelligence space, space systems and services
of the military departments, and intermediate and long-range mis-
sile defense systems; and Department of Energy national security
programs and accounts.
Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and Capa-
bilities: Department of Defense policy and programs and accounts
related to military intelligence, national intelligence, countering
weapons of mass destruction, counter-proliferation, counter-ter-
rorism, other sensitive military operations, special operations
forces, cyber security, cyber operations, cyber forces, information
technology, information operations, and science and technology (in-
cluding defense-wide programs and accounts related to research,
development, testing, and evaluation, except for those defense-wide
programs and accounts related to research, development, testing,
and evaluation of missile defense systems).
(3) Definitions—For the purposes of subparagraph (a)(2):
(A) The phrase ‘‘programs and accounts’’ means acquisition
and modernization programs, sustainment planning during
program development, and related funding lines for procure-
ment, advanced development, advanced component develop-
ment and prototypes, systems development, sustainment plan-
ning, and demonstration.
(B) The term ‘‘policy’’ means statutes, regulations, directives,
and other institutional guidance.
(C) The phrase ‘‘science and technology’’ means science and
technology programs and related funding lines for basic re-
search, applied research, and non-acquisition program ad-
vanced development.
(b) Membership of the Subcommittees
(1) Subcommittee memberships shall be filled in accordance with
the rules of the majority party’s caucus and the minority party’s
conference, respectively.
(2) The Chairman of the Committee and the Ranking Minority
Member thereof (hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Ranking Minority
Member’’) may sit as ex officio members of all subcommittees. Ex
officio members shall not vote in subcommittee hearings or meet-
ings or be taken into consideration for the purpose of determining
the ratio of the subcommittees or establishing a quorum at sub-
committee hearings or meetings.
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
(3) A member of the Committee who is not a member of a par-
ticular subcommittee may sit with the subcommittee and partici-
pate during any of its hearings but shall not have authority to vote,
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
7
cannot be counted for the purpose of achieving a quorum, and can-
not raise a point of order at the hearing.
RULE 5. COMMITTEE PANELS AND TASK FORCES
(a) Committee Panels
(1) The Chairman may designate a panel of the Committee con-
sisting of members of the Committee to inquire into and take testi-
mony on a matter or matters that fall within the jurisdiction of
more than one subcommittee and to report to the Committee.
(2) No panel appointed by the Chairman shall continue in exist-
ence for more than six months after the appointment. A panel so
appointed may, upon the expiration of six months, be reappointed
by the Chairman for a period of time which is not to exceed six
months.
(3) Consistent with the party ratios established by the majority
party, all majority members of the panels shall be appointed by the
Chairman, and all minority members shall be appointed by the
Ranking Minority Member. The Chairman shall choose one of the
majority members so appointed who does not currently chair an-
other subcommittee of the Committee to serve as chairman of the
panel. The Ranking Minority Member shall similarly choose the
ranking minority member of the panel.
(4) No panel shall have legislative jurisdiction.
(b) Committee and Subcommittee Task Forces
(1) The Chairman, or the chairman of a subcommittee with the
concurrence of the Chairman, may designate a task force to inquire
into and take testimony on a matter that falls within the jurisdic-
tion of the Committee or subcommittee, respectively. The Chair-
man and the Ranking Minority Member or the chairman and the
ranking minority member of a subcommittee shall each appoint an
equal number of members to the task force. The Chairman or the
chairman of a subcommittee shall choose one of the members so ap-
pointed, who does not currently chair another subcommittee of the
Committee, to serve as chairman of the task force. The Ranking
Minority Member or the ranking minority member of a sub-
committee shall similarly appoint the ranking minority member of
the task force.
(2) No task force appointed by the Chairman or the chairman of
a subcommittee shall continue in existence for more than three
months. A task force may only be reappointed for an additional
three months with the written concurrence of the Chairman and
the Ranking Minority Member or the concurrence of the chairman
and the ranking minority member of the subcommittee whose
chairman appointed the task force.
(3) No task force shall have legislative jurisdiction.
RULE 6. REFERENCE AND CONSIDERATION OF
LEGISLATION
(a) The Chairman shall refer legislation and other matters to the
appropriate subcommittee or to the full Committee.
(b) Legislation shall be taken up for a hearing or markup only
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
when called by the Chairman or the chairman of a subcommittee,
as appropriate, or by a majority of the Committee or subcommittee,
as appropriate.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
8
(c) The Chairman, with approval of a majority vote of a quorum
of the Committee, shall have authority to discharge a sub-
committee from consideration of any measure or matter referred
thereto and have such measure or matter considered by the Com-
mittee.
(d) Reports and recommendations of a subcommittee may not be
considered by the Committee until after the intervention of three
calendar days from the time the report is approved by the sub-
committee and available to the members of the Committee, except
that this rule may be waived by a majority vote of a quorum of the
Committee.
(e) The Chairman, in consultation with the Ranking Minority
Member, shall establish criteria for recommending legislation and
other matters to be considered by the House of Representatives,
pursuant to clause 1 of rule XV of the Rules of the House of Rep-
resentatives. Such criteria shall not conflict with the Rules of the
House of Representatives and other applicable rules.
RULE 7. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF HEARINGS AND
MEETINGS
(a) Pursuant to clause 2(g)(3) of rule XI of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, the Chairman, or the chairman of any sub-
committee, panel, or task force, shall make a public announcement
of the date, place, and subject matter of any hearing or meeting be-
fore that body at least one week before the commencement of a
hearing and at least three calendar days (excluding Saturdays,
Sundays, or legal holidays except when the House is in session on
such a day) before the commencement of a meeting. However, if the
Chairman, with the concurrence of the Ranking Minority Member,
or the chairman of any subcommittee, panel, or task force, with the
concurrence of the respective ranking minority member, determines
that there is good cause to begin the hearing or meeting sooner, or
if the Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task force so determines
by majority vote, a quorum being present for the transaction of
business, such chairman shall make the announcement at the ear-
liest possible date. Any announcement made under this rule shall
be promptly published in the Daily Digest, and promptly made
publicly available in electronic form.
(b) At least 24 hours prior to the commencement of a meeting for
the markup of legislation, or at the time of an announcement under
paragraph (a) made within 24 hours before such meeting, the
Chairman, or the chairman of any subcommittee, panel, or task
force shall cause the text of such measure or matter to be made
publicly available in electronic form as provided in clause 2(g)(4) of
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives.
RULE 8. BROADCASTING OF COMMITTEE HEARINGS AND
MEETINGS
(a) Pursuant to clause 2(e)(5) of rule XI of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, the Committee shall, to the maximum extent
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
practicable, provide audio and video coverage of each hearing or
meeting for the transaction of business in a manner that allows the
public to easily listen to and view the proceedings. The Committee
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
9
shall maintain the recordings of such coverage in a manner that is
easily accessible to the public.
(b) Clause 4 of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representa-
tives shall apply to the Committee.
RULE 9. MEETINGS AND HEARINGS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
(a) Each hearing and meeting for the transaction of business, in-
cluding the markup of legislation, conducted by the Committee, or
any subcommittee, panel, or task force, to the extent that the re-
spective body is authorized to conduct markups, shall be open to
the public except when the Committee, subcommittee, panel, or
task force in open session and with a majority being present, deter-
mines by record vote that all or part of the remainder of that hear-
ing or meeting on that day shall be in executive session because
disclosure of testimony, evidence, or other matters to be considered
would endanger the national security, would compromise sensitive
law enforcement information, or would violate any law or rule of
the House of Representatives. Notwithstanding the requirements of
the preceding sentence, a majority of those present, there being in
attendance no fewer than two members of the Committee, sub-
committee, panel, or task force may vote to close a hearing or meet-
ing for the sole purpose of discussing whether testimony or evi-
dence to be received would endanger the national security, would
compromise sensitive law enforcement information, or would vio-
late any law or rule of the House of Representatives. If the decision
is to proceed in executive session, the vote must be by record vote
and in open session, a majority of the Committee, subcommittee,
panel, or task force being present.
(b) Whenever it is asserted by a member of the Committee, sub-
committee, panel, or task force that the evidence or testimony at
a hearing may tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate any person,
or it is asserted by a witness that the evidence or testimony that
the witness would give at a hearing may tend to defame, degrade,
or incriminate the witness, notwithstanding the requirements of
paragraph (a) and the provisions of clause 2(g)(2)(A) of rule XI of
the Rules of the House of Representatives and in accordance with
the provisions of clause 2(g)(2)(B) of rule XI of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, such evidence or testimony shall be pre-
sented in executive session, if by a majority vote of those present,
there being in attendance no fewer than two members of the Com-
mittee, subcommittee, panel, or task force, the Committee, sub-
committee, panel, or task force determines that such evidence may
tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate any person. A majority of
those present, there being in attendance no fewer than two mem-
bers of the Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task force may also
vote to close the hearing or meeting for the sole purpose of dis-
cussing whether evidence or testimony to be received would tend
to defame, degrade, or incriminate any person. The Committee,
subcommittee, panel, or task force shall proceed to receive such tes-
timony in open session only if the Committee, subcommittee, panel,
or task force, a majority being present, determines that such evi-
dence or testimony will not tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
any person.
(c) Notwithstanding the foregoing, and with the approval of the
Chairman, each member of the Committee may designate by letter
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
10
to the Chairman, one member of that member’s personal staff, and
an alternate, which may include fellows, with Top Secret security
clearance to attend hearings of the Committee, or that member’s
subcommittee(s), panel(s), or task force(s) (excluding briefings or
meetings held under the provisions of committee rule 9(a)), which
have been closed under the provisions of rule 9(a) above for na-
tional security purposes for the taking of testimony. The attend-
ance of such a staff member or fellow at such hearings is subject
to the approval of the Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task
force as dictated by national security requirements at that time.
The attainment of any required security clearances is the responsi-
bility of individual members of the Committee.
(d) Pursuant to clause 2(g)(2) of rule XI of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, no Member, Delegate, or Resident Commis-
sioner may be excluded from nonparticipatory attendance at any
hearing of the Committee or a subcommittee, unless the House of
Representatives shall by majority vote authorize the Committee or
subcommittee, for purposes of a particular series of hearings on a
particular article of legislation or on a particular subject of inves-
tigation, to close its hearings to Members, Delegates, and the Resi-
dent Commissioner by the same procedures designated in this rule
for closing hearings to the public.
(e) The Committee or the subcommittee may vote, by the same
procedure, to meet in executive session for up to five additional
consecutive days of hearings.
RULE 10. QUORUM
(a) For purposes of taking testimony and receiving evidence, two
members shall constitute a quorum.
(b) One-third of the members of the Committee or subcommittee
shall constitute a quorum for taking any action, with the following
exceptions, in which case a majority of the Committee or sub-
committee shall constitute a quorum:
(1) Reporting a measure or recommendation;
(2) Closing Committee or subcommittee meetings and hear-
ings to the public;
(3) Authorizing the issuance of subpoenas;
(4) Authorizing the use of executive session material; and
(5) Voting to proceed in open session after voting to close to
discuss whether evidence or testimony to be received would
tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate any person.
(c) No measure or recommendation shall be reported to the
House of Representatives unless a majority of the Committee is ac-
tually present.
RULE 11. THE FIVE-MINUTE RULE
(a) Subject to rule 15, the time any one member may address the
Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task force on any measure or
matter under consideration shall not exceed five minutes and then
only when the member has been recognized by the Chairman or
subcommittee chairman, as appropriate, except that this time limit
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
may be exceeded by unanimous consent. Any member, upon re-
quest, shall be recognized for not more than five minutes to ad-
dress the Committee or subcommittee on behalf of an amendment
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
11
which the member has offered to any pending bill or resolution.
The five-minute limitation shall not apply to the Chairman and the
Ranking Minority Member or the chairman and the ranking minor-
ity member of a subcommittee, panel, or task force.
(b)(1) Members who are present at a hearing of the Committee,
subcommittee, panel, or task force when a hearing is originally con-
vened shall be recognized by the Chairman or subcommittee, panel,
or task force chairman, as appropriate, in order of seniority. Those
members arriving subsequently shall be recognized in order of their
arrival. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Chairman and the
Ranking Minority Member or the chairman and the ranking minor-
ity member of a subcommittee, panel, or task force, as appropriate,
will take precedence upon their arrival. In recognizing members to
question witnesses in this fashion, the Chairman shall take into
consideration the ratio of the majority to minority members present
and shall establish the order of recognition for questioning in such
a manner as not to disadvantage the members of either party.
(2) Pursuant to rule 4 and subject to rule 15, a member of
the Committee who is not a member of a subcommittee, panel,
or task force may be recognized by a subcommittee, panel, or
task force chairman in order of their arrival and after all
present subcommittee, panel, or task force members have been
recognized.
(3) The Chairman of the Committee or the chairman of a
subcommittee, panel, or task force, with the concurrence of the
respective ranking minority member, may depart with the reg-
ular order for questioning which is specified in paragraphs (a)
and (b) of this rule provided that such a decision is announced
prior to the hearing or prior to the opening statements of the
witnesses and that any such departure applies equally to the
majority and the minority.
(c) No person other than a Member, Delegate, or Resident Com-
missioner of Congress and committee staff may be seated in or be-
hind the dais area during Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task
force hearings and meetings.
RULE 12. POWER TO SIT AND ACT; SUBPOENA POWER
(a) For the purpose of carrying out any of its functions and duties
under rules X and XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives,
the Committee and any subcommittee is authorized (subject to sub-
paragraph (b)(1) of this paragraph):
(1) to sit and act at such times and places within the United
States, whether the House is in session, has recessed, or has
adjourned, and to hold hearings, and
(2) to require by subpoena, or otherwise, the attendance and
testimony of such witnesses and the production of such books,
records, correspondence, memorandums, papers and docu-
ments, including, but not limited to, those in electronic form,
as it considers necessary.
(b)(1) A subpoena may be authorized and issued by the Com-
mittee, or any subcommittee with the concurrence of the Chairman
and after consultation with the Ranking Minority Member, under
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
subparagraph (a)(2) in the conduct of any investigation, or series
of investigations or activities, only when authorized by a majority
of the members voting, a majority of the Committee or sub-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
12
committee being present. Authorized subpoenas shall be signed
only by the Chairman, or by any member designated by the Com-
mittee.
(2) Pursuant to clause 2(m) of rule XI of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, compliance with any subpoena issued by the
Committee or any subcommittee under subparagraph (a)(2) may be
enforced only as authorized or directed by the House of Representa-
tives.
RULE 13. WITNESS STATEMENTS
(a) Any prepared statement to be presented by a witness to the
Committee or a subcommittee, panel, or task force shall be sub-
mitted to the Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task force at
least 48 hours in advance of presentation and shall be distributed
to all members of the Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task
force as soon as practicable but not less than 24 hours in advance
of presentation. A copy of any such prepared statement shall also
be submitted to the Committee in electronic form. If a prepared
statement contains national security information bearing a classi-
fication of Confidential or higher, the statement shall be made
available in the Committee rooms to all members of the Com-
mittee, subcommittee, panel, or task force as soon as practicable
but not less than 24 hours in advance of presentation; however, no
such statement shall be removed from the Committee offices. The
requirement of this rule may be waived by a majority vote of the
Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task force, a quorum being
present. In cases where a witness does not submit a statement by
the time required under this rule, the Chairman, with the concur-
rence of the Ranking Minority Member, or the chairman of a sub-
committee, panel, or task force, as appropriate, with the concur-
rence of the respective ranking minority member, may elect to ex-
clude the witness from the hearing.
(b) The Committee and each subcommittee, panel, or task force
shall require each witness who is to appear before it to file with
the Committee in advance of his or her appearance a written state-
ment of the proposed testimony and to limit the oral presentation
at such appearance to a brief summary of the submitted written
statement.
(c) Pursuant to clause 2(g)(5) of rule XI of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, written witness statements, with appropriate
redactions to protect the privacy of the witness, shall be made pub-
licly available in electronic form not later than one day after the
witness appears.
RULE 14. ADMINISTERING OATHS TO WITNESSES
(a) The Chairman, or any member designated by the Chairman,
may administer oaths to any witness.
(b) Witnesses, when sworn, shall subscribe to the following oath:
‘‘Do you solemnly swear (or affirm) that the testimony
you will give before this Committee (or subcommittee,
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
panel, or task force) in the matters now under consider-
ation will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth, so help you God?’’
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
13
RULE 15. QUESTIONING OF WITNESSES
(a) When a witness is before the Committee or a subcommittee,
panel, or task force, members of the Committee, subcommittee,
panel, or task force may put questions to the witness only when
recognized by the Chairman, subcommittee, panel, or task force
chairman, as appropriate, for that purpose according to rule 11 of
the Committee.
(b) Members of the Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task
force who so desire shall have not more than five minutes to ques-
tion each witness or panel of witnesses, the responses of the wit-
ness or witnesses being included in the five-minute period, until
such time as each member has had an opportunity to question each
witness or panel of witnesses. Thereafter, additional rounds for
questioning witnesses by members are within the discretion of the
Chairman or the subcommittee, panel, or task force chairman, as
appropriate.
(c) Questions put to witnesses before the Committee, sub-
committee, panel, or task force shall be pertinent to the measure
or matter that may be before the Committee, subcommittee, panel,
or task force for consideration.
RULE 16. PUBLICATION OF COMMITTEE HEARINGS AND
MARKUPS
The transcripts of those hearings conducted by the Committee,
subcommittee, panel, or task force will be published officially in
substantially verbatim form, with the material requested for the
record inserted at that place requested, or at the end of the record,
as appropriate. The transcripts of markups conducted by the Com-
mittee or any subcommittee may be published officially in verbatim
form. Any requests to correct any errors, other than those in tran-
scription, will be appended to the record, and the appropriate place
where the change is requested will be footnoted. Any transcript
published under this rule shall include the results of record votes
conducted in the session covered by the transcript and shall also
include materials that have been submitted for the record and are
covered under rule 19. The handling and safekeeping of these ma-
terials shall fully satisfy the requirements of rule 20. No transcript
of an executive session conducted under rule 9 shall be published
under this rule.
RULE 17. VOTING AND ROLLCALLS
(a) Voting on a measure or matter may be by record vote, divi-
sion vote, voice vote, or unanimous consent.
(b) A record vote shall be ordered upon the request of one-fifth
of those members present.
(c) No vote by any member of the Committee or a subcommittee
with respect to any measure or matter shall be cast by proxy.
(d) In the event of a vote or votes, when a member is in attend-
ance at any other committee, subcommittee, or conference com-
mittee meeting during that time, the necessary absence of that
member shall be so noted in the record vote record, upon timely no-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
tification to the Chairman by that member.
(e) The Chairman, with the concurrence of the Ranking Minority
Member, or the chairman of a subcommittee, as appropriate, with
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
14
the concurrence of the respective ranking minority member or the
most senior minority member who is present at the time, may elect
to postpone requested record votes until such time or point at a
markup as is mutually decided. When proceedings resume on a
postponed question, notwithstanding any intervening order for the
previous question, the underlying proposition shall remain subject
to further debate or amendment to the same extent as when the
question was postponed.
RULE 18. COMMITTEE REPORTS
(a) If, at the time of approval of any measure or matter by the
Committee, any member of the Committee gives timely notice of in-
tention to file supplemental, minority, additional or dissenting
views, all members shall be entitled to not less than two calendar
days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays except
when the House is in session on such days) in which to file such
written and signed views with the Staff Director of the Committee,
or the Staff Director’s designee. All such views so filed by one or
more members of the Committee shall be included within, and
shall be a part of, the report filed by the Committee with respect
to that measure or matter.
(b) With respect to each record vote on a motion to report any
measure or matter, and on any amendment offered to the measure
or matter, the total number of votes cast for and against, the
names of those voting for and against, and a brief description of the
question, shall be included in the Committee report on the measure
or matter.
(c) Not later than 24 hours after the adoption of any amendment
to a measure or matter considered by the Committee, the Chair-
man shall cause the text of each such amendment to be made pub-
licly available in electronic form as provided in clause 2(e)(6) of
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives.
RULE 19. PUBLIC INSPECTION OF COMMITTEE ROLLCALLS
The result of each record vote in any meeting of the Committee
shall be made available by the Committee for inspection by the
public at reasonable times in the offices of the Committee and also
made publicly available in electronic form within 48 hours of such
record vote pursuant to clause 2(e)(1)(B)(i) of rule XI of the Rules
of the House of Representatives. Information so available shall in-
clude a description of the amendment, motion, order, or other prop-
osition and the name of each member voting for and each member
voting against such amendment, motion, order, or proposition and
the names of those members present but not voting.
RULE 20. PROTECTION OF NATIONAL SECURITY AND
OTHER INFORMATION
(a) Except as provided in clause 2(g) of rule XI of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, all national security information
bearing a classification of Confidential or higher which has been re-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
ceived by the Committee or a subcommittee shall be deemed to
have been received in executive session and shall be given appro-
priate safekeeping.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
15
(b) The Chairman shall, with the approval of a majority of the
Committee, establish such procedures as in his judgment may be
necessary to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of any national
security information that is received which is classified as Con-
fidential or higher. Such procedures shall, however, ensure access
to this information by any member of the Committee or any other
Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner of the House of Rep-
resentatives, staff of the Committee, or staff designated under rule
9(c) who have the appropriate security clearances and the need to
know, who has requested the opportunity to review such material.
(c) The Chairman shall, in consultation with the Ranking Minor-
ity Member, establish such procedures as in his judgment may be
necessary to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of any proprietary
information that is received by the Committee, subcommittee,
panel, or task force. Such procedures shall be consistent with the
Rules of the House of Representatives and applicable law.
RULE 21. COMMITTEE STAFFING
The staffing of the Committee, the standing subcommittees, and
any panel or task force designated by the Chairman or the chair-
men of the subcommittees shall be subject to the Rules of the
House of Representatives.
RULE 22. COMMITTEE RECORDS
The records of the Committee at the National Archives and
Records Administration shall be made available for public use in
accordance with rule VII of the Rules of the House of Representa-
tives. The Chairman shall notify the Ranking Minority Member of
any decision, pursuant to clause 3(b)(3) or clause 4(b) of rule VII,
to withhold a record otherwise available, and the matter shall be
presented to the Committee for a determination on the written re-
quest of any member of the Committee.
RULE 23. HEARING PROCEDURES
Clause 2(k) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representa-
tives shall apply to the Committee.
RULE 24. COMMITTEE ACTIVITY REPORTS
Not later than January 2nd of each odd-numbered year the Com-
mittee shall submit to the House a report on its activities, pursu-
ant to clause 1(d) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Represent-
atives.
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED
SERVICES
FULL COMMITTEE
Pursuant to H. Res. 24, H. Res. 25, H. Res. 42, H. Res. 68, and
H. Res. 712, the following Members have served on the Committee
on Armed Services in the 116th Congress:
ADAM SMITH, Washington, Chairman
SUSAN A. DAVIS, California WILLIAM M. ‘‘MAC’’ THORNBERRY, Texas
JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island JOE WILSON, South Carolina
RICK LARSEN, Washington ROB BISHOP, Utah
JIM COOPER, Tennessee MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio
JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut MIKE ROGERS, Alabama
JOHN GARAMENDI, California K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas
JACKIE SPEIER, California DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado
TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia
DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri
RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia
SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts MO BROOKS, Alabama
SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California PAUL COOK, California 3
ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland, Vice BRADLEY BYRNE, Alabama
Chair SAM GRAVES, Missouri
RO KHANNA, California ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York
WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee
FILEMON VELA, Texas RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana
ANDY KIM, New Jersey TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
KENDRA S. HORN, Oklahoma MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin
GILBERT RAY CISNEROS, Jr., California MATT GAETZ, Florida
CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania DON BACON, Nebraska
JASON CROW, Colorado JIM BANKS, Indiana
XOCHITL TORRES SMALL, New Mexico LIZ CHENEY, Wyoming
ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan 4
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey JACK BERGMAN, Michigan
KATIE HILL, California 1 MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
DEBRA A. HAALAND, New Mexico
JARED GOLDEN, Maine
LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts
ELAINE G. LURIA, Virginia
ANTHONY BRINDISI, New York 2
1 Mrs. Hill resigned from the committee on November 3, 2019.
2 Mr. Brindisi was elected to the committee on November 19, 2019
3 Mr. Cook resigned from the committee on December 7, 2020.
4 Mr. Mitchell’s election to the committee was vacated on December 15, 2020.
SUBCOMMITTEES OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED
SERVICES
The following subcommittees were established at the committee’s
organizational meeting on January 24, 2019.
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
(17)
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
18
Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and
Capabilities
Jurisdiction Pursuant to Committee Rule 4—Department of De-
fense policy and programs and accounts related to military intel-
ligence, national intelligence, countering weapons of mass destruc-
tion, counter-proliferation, counter-terrorism, other sensitive mili-
tary operations, special operations forces, cyber security, cyber op-
erations, cyber forces, information technology, information oper-
ations, and science and technology (including defense-wide pro-
grams and accounts related to research, development, testing, and
evaluation, except for those defense-wide programs and accounts
related to research, development, testing, and evaluation of missile
defense systems).
JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island, Chairman
RICK LARSEN, Washington ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York
JIM COOPER, Tennessee SAM GRAVES, Missouri
TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana
ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas
RO KHANNA, California AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia
WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee
ANDY KIM, New Jersey MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin
CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
JASON CROW, Colorado, Vice Chair DON BACON, Nebraska
ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan JIM BANKS, Indiana
LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts
Subcommittee on Military Personnel
Jurisdiction Pursuant to Committee Rule 4—Department of De-
fense policy and programs and accounts related to military per-
sonnel and their families, Reserve Component integration and em-
ployment, military health care, military education, dependent
schools, POW/MIA issues, Morale, Welfare and Recreation, com-
missaries, cemeteries under the jurisdiction of the Department of
Defense, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and military retire-
ment issues.
JACKIE SPEIER, California, Chairwoman
SUSAN A. DAVIS, California TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana
GILBERT RAY CISNEROS, Jr., California, LIZ CHENEY, Wyoming
Vice Chair PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan 1
VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas JACK BERGMAN, Michigan
DEBRA A. HAALAND, New Mexico MATT GAETZ, Florida
LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts
ELAINE G. LURIA, Virginia
1 Mr. Mitchell’s election to the committee was vacated on December 15, 2020.
Subcommittee on Readiness
Jurisdiction Pursuant to Committee Rule 4—Department of De-
fense policy and programs and accounts related to military readi-
ness, training, logistics and maintenance, military construction, or-
ganic industrial base, the civilian and contract workforce, environ-
ment, military installations and real property management, family
housing, base realignments and closures, and energy.
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
19
JOHN GARAMENDI, California, Chairman
TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado
ANDY KIM, New Jersey, Vice Chair AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia
KENDRA S. HORN, Oklahoma JOE WILSON, South Carolina
CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania ROB BISHOP, Utah
JASON CROW, Colorado MIKE ROGERS, Alabama
XOCHITL TORRES SMALL, New Mexico MO BROOKS, Alabama
ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York
VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas JACK BERGMAN, Michigan
DEBRA A. HAALAND, New Mexico
Subcommittee on Seapower And Projection Forces
Jurisdiction Pursuant to Committee Rule 4—Navy and Marine
Corps acquisition programs and accounts related to shipbuilding
and conversion, reconnaissance and surveillance, tanker, and airlift
aircraft, ship and submarine-launched weapons, ammunition, and
other procurements; Air Force programs and accounts related to
bomber, tanker, and airlift aircraft; Army programs and accounts
related to waterborne vessels; and Maritime policy and programs
and accounts under the jurisdiction of the Committee as delineated
in paragraphs 5 and 9 of clause 1(c) of rule X of the Rules of the
House of Representatives.
JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut, Chairman
JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia
JIM COOPER, Tennessee K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas
DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin
SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts JACK BERGMAN, Michigan
FILEMON VELA, Texas MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
GILBERT RAY CISNEROS, Jr., California VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey PAUL COOK, California 3
KATIE HILL, California 1 BRADLEY BYRNE, Alabama
JARED GOLDEN, Maine TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
ELAINE LURIA, Virginia, Vice Chair
ANTHONY BRINDISI, New York 2
1 Mrs. Hill resigned from the committee on November 3, 2019.
2 Mr. Brindisi was assigned to the subcommittee on November 19, 2019.
3 Mr. Cook resigned from the committee on December 7, 2020.
Subcommittee on Strategic Forces
Jurisdiction Pursuant to Committee Rule 4—Department of De-
fense and Department of Energy policy related to strategic deter-
rence, strategic stability, nuclear weapons, strategic and nuclear
arms control, nonproliferation, nuclear safety, missile defense, and
space; Department of Defense programs and accounts related to
nuclear weapons, strategic missiles, nuclear command and control
systems, Department of Defense intelligence space, space systems
and services of the military departments, and intermediate and
long-range missile defense systems; and Department of Energy na-
tional security programs and accounts.
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
20
JIM COOPER, Tennessee, Chairman
SUSAN A. DAVIS, California MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio
RICK LARSEN, Washington JOE WILSON, South Carolina
JOHN GARAMENDI, California ROB BISHOP, Utah
JACKIE SPEIER, California MIKE ROGERS, Alabama
SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts MO BROOKS, Alabama
SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California BRADLEY BYRNE, Alabama
RO KHANNA, California SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee
WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts LIZ CHENEY, Wyoming
KENDRA S. HORN, Oklahoma, Vice Chair
Subcommittee on Tactical Air And Land Forces
Jurisdiction Pursuant to Committee Rule 4—Army programs and
accounts related to aircraft, ground equipment, missiles, ammuni-
tion, and other procurement; Marine Corps programs and accounts
related to ground and amphibious equipment, fighter aircraft, heli-
copters, air-launched weapons, and ammunition; Air Force pro-
grams and accounts related to fighter, training, reconnaissance and
surveillance, and electronic warfare aircraft, helicopters, air-
launched weapons, ground equipment, and ammunition; Navy pro-
grams and accounts related to fighter, training, and electronic war-
fare aircraft, helicopters, and air-launched weapons; tactical air
and missile defense programs and accounts; chemical agent and
munition destruction programs and accounts; and National Guard
and Reserve equipment programs and accounts.
DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey, Chairman
JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri
JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut PAUL COOK, California 3
RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona MATT GAETZ, Florida
SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California DON BACON, Nebraska
ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland JIM BANKS, Indiana
FILEMON VELA, Texas PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan 4
XOCHITL TORRES SMALL, New Mexico, MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio
Vice Chair DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia
KATIE HILL, California 1
JARED GOLDEN, Maine
ANTHONY BRINDISI. New York 2
1 Mrs. Hill resigned from the committee on November 3, 2019.
2 Mr. Brindisi was assigned to the subcommittee on November 19, 2019.
3 Mr. Cook resigned from the committee on December 7, 2020.
4 Mr. Mitchell’s election to the committee was vacated on December 15, 2020.
TASK FORCE OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
The Future of Defense Task Force was appointed on October 16,
2019, and was reappointed on January 15, 2020.
Future of Defense Task Force
Jurisdiction pursuant to Committee Rule 5—The Future of De-
fense Task Force was chartered to review U.S. defense assets and
capabilities and assess the state of the national security innovation
base to meet emerging threats.
SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts, Chair JIM BANKS, Indiana, Chair
SUSAN DAVIS, California SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee
CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6646 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
COMMITTEE STAFF
By committee resolution adopted at the organizational meeting
on January 24, 2019, or by authority of the chairman, the following
persons have been appointed to the staff of the committee during
the 116th Congress:
Paul Arcangeli, Staff Director
Daniel Sennott, Minority Staff Director
Jen Stewart, Minority Staff Director (resigned January 12, 2020)
Douglas Bush, Deputy Staff Director
Betty B. Gray, Executive Assistant
John F. Sullivan, Professional Staff Member (resigned February 2, 2019)
Jesse D. Tolleson, Jr., Professional Staff Member
Rebecca A. Ross, Professional Staff Member
Heath R. Bope, Professional Staff Member
David Sienicki, Professional Staff Member
Zach Steacy, Director, Legislative Operations
Everett Coleman, Professional Staff Member
Craig Greene, Professional Staff Member
Phil MacNaughton, Professional Staff Member
Jack Schuler, Budget Director (resigned January 17, 2019)
John N. Johnson, Staff Assistant (resigned February 1, 2020)
William S. Johnson, General Counsel
Peter Villano, Professional Staff Member (resigned March 1, 2020)
Leonor Tomero, Counsel
Brian Garrett, Professional Staff Member
Claude Chafin, Communications Director (resigned December 11, 2020)
Katie Thompson, Security Manager
David Giachetti, Professional Staff Member
Lindsay Kavanaugh, Professional Staff Member (resigned September 6, 2019)
Mark Morehouse, Professional Staff Member
Katy Quinn, Professional Staff Member
Barron YoungSmith, Counsel/Communications Director
Brian Greer, Professional Staff Member (resigned December 1, 2019)
Jason Schmid, Professional Staff Member
Megan Handal, Clerk (resigned November 30, 2019)
Danielle Steitz, Clerk
Thomas Hawley, Professional Staff Member (resigned June 10, 2019)
Sarah Mineiro, Professional Staff Member (resigned April 1, 2020)
Shenita White, Office Manager
Hannah Scheenstra, Executive Assistant (resigned April 9, 2019)
Glen Diehl, Professional Staff Member
Maria Vastola, Professional Staff Member
Kim Lehn, Professional Staff Member
Jamie Jackson, Deputy General Counsel
Stephanie Halcrow, Professional Staff Member
Eric Snelgrove, Professional Staff Member
Justin Lynch, Clerk (resigned April 26, 2019)
Caroline Kehrli, Clerk
Zachary Taylor, Clerk
William Sutey, Professional Staff Member
Elizabeth Griffin, Professional Staff Member
Halimah Najieb-Locke, Counsel (resigned June 4, 2020)
Michael Hermann, Budget Director
Carla Zeppieri, Professional Staff Member
Sapna Sharma, Professional Staff Member
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
(21)
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6646 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
22
Kelly Goggin, Professional Staff Member
Melanie Harris, Professional Staff Member
William T. Johnson, Professional Staff Member
Chidi Blyden, Professional Staff Member (appointed January 7, 2019)
Grant Schneider, Professional Staff Member (appointed January 7, 2019)
Joshua Stiefel, Professional Staff Member (appointed January 10, 2019)
Jonathan Lord, Professional Staff Member (appointed January 14, 2019)
Jeanine Womble, Professional Staff Member (appointed January 14, 2019)
Jessica Carroll, Professional Staff Member (appointed January 21, 2019)
Matt Rhoades, Professional Staff Member (appointed January 21, 2019)
Bess Dopkeen, Professional Staff Member (appointed January 28, 2019)
Sean Falvey, Clerk (appointed February 1, 2019)
Jonathan Pawlow, Professional Staff Member (appointed February 1, 2019, resigned January
2, 2020)
Laura Rauch, Professional Staff Member (appointed February 25, 2019)
Monica Matoush, Communications Director (appointed February 27, 2019)
Shannon Green, Professional Staff Member (appointed April 15, 2019)
Caleb Randall-Bodman, Deputy Communications Director (appointed April 22, 2019)
Alonzo Webb, Clerk (appointed April 23, 2019)
Alexis Hasty, Executive Assistant (appointed May 1, 2019)
John Muller, Professional Staff Member (appointed May 9, 2019)
Emma Morrison, Clerk (appointed June 3, 2019)
Troy Nienberg, Professional Staff Member (appointed January 6, 2020)
Sidney Faix, Clerk (appointed January 13, 2020)
Natalie De Benedetti, Clerk (appointed January 13, 2020)
James Vallario, Professional Staff Member (appointed February 21, 2020)
Naajidah Khan, Clerk (appointed April 15, 2020)
Paul Golden, Professional Staff Member (appointed April 20, 2020)
Hannah Kaufman, Professional Staff Member (appointed April 26, 2020)
Karen Thornton, Professional Staff Member (appointed June 29, 2020)
Jeff Bozman, Professional Staff Member (appointed July 13, 2020)
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6646 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
COMMITTEE MEETINGS AND HEARINGS
A total of 227 meetings and hearings have been held by the Com-
mittee on Armed Services, its subcommittees, and task force during
the 116th Congress. A breakdown of the meetings and hearings fol-
lows:
FULL COMMITTEE ................................................................................................ 65
SUBCOMMITTEES:
Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and Capabilities ...... 32
Subcommittee on Military Personnel .............................................................. 22
Subcommittee on Readiness ............................................................................ 25
Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces ........................................ 21
Subcommittee on Strategic Forces .................................................................. 23
Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces ............................................ 20
TASK FORCE:
Future of Defense Task Force ......................................................................... 19
LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES
PUBLIC LAWS
Public Law 116–11 (S. 252)—A Bill to Authorize the Honorary Ap-
pointment of Robert J. Dole to the Grade of Colonel in the Reg-
ular Army
S. 252, ‘‘A bill to authorize the honorary appointment of Robert
J. Dole to the grade of colonel in the regular Army’’, was introduced
in the Senate by Senator Pat Roberts on January 29, 2019, and re-
ferred to the Senate Committee on Armed Services. On March 4,
2019, the Senate Committee on Armed Services was discharged
from S. 252 and it passed the Senate without amendment by unan-
imous consent. On March 5, 2019, S. 252 was received in the House
and referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and subse-
quently to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel. On March 26,
2019, Representative Gilbert R. Cisneros, Jr. asked unanimous con-
sent that the Committee on Armed Services be discharged from
further consideration of S. 252 and for its immediate consideration
in the House. There was no objection to the request, and S. 252
was passed in the House by unanimous consent. On April 6, 2019,
S. 252 was signed by the President and became Public Law 116–
11.
Public Law 116–92 (S. 1790)—National Defense Authorization Act
For Fiscal Year 2020
S. 1790 was reported to the Senate as an original measure by
Chairman James M. Inhofe on June 11, 2019. The Senate began
consideration of S. 1790 on June 24, 2019. It passed the Senate
with an amendment by yea-nay vote, 86–8 (Record Vote Number:
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
(23)
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
24
188) on June 27, 2019. On July 2, 2019, S. 1790 was sent to the
House and held at the desk.
On September 17, 2019, Chairman Adam Smith (WA) asked
unanimous consent to take from the Speaker’s table, the bill S.
1790, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House; to
strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof
the provisions of H.R. 2500 as passed by the House; to pass the
Senate bill, as amended; and to insist on the House amendment
thereto and request a conference with the Senate thereon. The re-
quest was agreed to without objection. On September 18, 2019, the
Senate disagreed to the House amendment to the Senate bill and
agreed to the request for conference.
On December 9, 2019, the conference report to accompany S.
1790 (H. Rept. 116–333) was filed in the House. On December 11,
2019, the conference report was agreed to in the House by the yeas
and nays, 377–48 (Roll no. 627). On December 17, 2019, the con-
ference report was agreed to in Senate, 86–8 (Record Vote Number:
400). The President signed the legislation on December 20, 2019,
and it became Public Law 116–92.
Public Law 116–92 did the following: (1) authorized appropria-
tions for fiscal year 2020 for procurement and for research, devel-
opment, test, and evaluation (RDT&E); (2) authorized appropria-
tions for fiscal year 2020 for operation and maintenance (O&M)
and for working capital funds; (3) authorized for fiscal year 2020
the personnel strength for each Active Duty component of the mili-
tary departments, and the personnel strength for the Selected Re-
serve for each Reserve Component of the Armed Forces; (4) modi-
fied various elements of compensation for military personnel and
imposed certain requirements and limitations on personnel actions
in the defense establishment; (5) authorized appropriations for fis-
cal year 2020 for military construction and family housing; (6) au-
thorized appropriations for Overseas Contingency Operations; (7)
authorized appropriations for fiscal year 2020 for the Department
of Energy national security programs; and (8) authorized appro-
priations for fiscal year 2020 for the Maritime Administration.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 is
a key mechanism through which Congress fulfills one of its pri-
mary responsibilities as mandated in Article I, Section 8, of the
Constitution of the United States, which grants Congress the
power to provide for the common defense, to raise and support an
Army, to provide and maintain a Navy, and to make rules for the
Government and regulation of the land and naval forces. Rule X of
the House of Representatives provides the House Committee on
Armed Services with jurisdiction over the Department of Defense
generally and over the military application of nuclear energy. The
bill includes the large majority of the findings and recommenda-
tions resulting from its oversight activities, conducted through
hearings, briefings, and roundtable discussions with Department of
Defense and Department of Energy civilian and military officials,
intelligence analysts, outside experts, and industry representatives,
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
and informed by the experience gained over the previous decades
of the committee’s existence.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
25
Public Law 116–210 (H.R. 8276)—To Authorize the President to
Posthumously Award the Medal of Honor to Alwyn C. Cashe for
Acts of Valor during Operation Iraqi Freedom
H.R. 8276, ‘‘To authorize the President to posthumously award
the Medal of Honor to Alwyn C. Cashe for acts of valor during Op-
eration Iraqi Freedom’’, was introduced on September 16, 2020, by
Representative Stephanie N. Murphy and was referred to the Com-
mittee on Armed Services. On September 22, 2020, Representative
Kendra S. Horn asked unanimous consent that the Committee on
Armed Services be discharged from further consideration of the bill
and for its immediate consideration in the House. There was no ob-
jection to the request, and H.R. 8276 was passed in the House by
unanimous consent. On September 23, 2020, H.R. 8276 was re-
ceived in the Senate and read twice. On November 10, 2020, it was
passed in the Senate by unanimous consent. On December 4, 2020,
H.R. 8276 was signed by the President and became Public Law
116–210.
LEGISLATION PASSED THE HOUSE OVER VETO
H.R. 6395—William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2021
On March 26, 2020, H.R. 6395, the National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2021, was introduced by Chairman Adam
Smith and referred to the Committee on Armed Services. On July
1, 2020, the Committee on Armed Services held a markup session
to consider H.R. 6395. The committee ordered the bill H.R. 6395,
as amended, favorably reported to the House of Representatives by
a recorded vote of 56–0, a quorum being present. The short title of
the bill, as reported to the House, was amended to the ‘‘William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021’’. The bill passed the House, as amended, on July 21,
2020, by recorded vote, 295–125 (Roll no. 152). On August 5, 2020,
the bill was received in the Senate, read twice, and placed on Sen-
ate Legislative Calendar under General Orders Calendar No. 505.
On November 16, 2020, the measure was laid before the Senate
by unanimous consent and the Senate passed H.R. 6395 with an
amendment in the nature of a substitute by a voice vote.
On November 18, 2020, Chairman Smith requested that the
House disagree to the Senate amendment and request a conference
with the Senate by unanimous consent. On December 2, 2020, the
Senate insisted on its amendment and agreed to the request for a
conference by unanimous consent. On December 3, 2020, the con-
ference report to accompany H.R. 6395 (H. Rept. 116–617) was filed
in the House. On December 8, 2020, the conference report was
agreed to in the House by the yeas and nays, 335–78–1 (Roll no.
238). On December 11, 2020, the conference report was agreed to
in the Senate by a yea-nay vote, 84–13 (Record Vote Number: 264).
The bill was presented to the President on December 11, 2020. The
bill was vetoed by the President on December 23, 2020. On Decem-
ber 28, 2020, the House considered the veto message of the Presi-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
dent. The House passed H.R. 6395 over veto by the yeas and nays
(2/3 required), 322–87 (Roll no. 253).
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
26
The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2021 does the following: (1) authorize ap-
propriations for fiscal year 2021 for procurement and for research,
development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E); (2) authorize appro-
priations for fiscal year 2021 for operation and maintenance (O&M)
and for working capital funds; (3) authorize for fiscal year 2021 the
personnel strength for each Active Duty component of the military
departments, and the personnel strength for the Selected Reserve
for each Reserve Component of the Armed Forces; (4) modify var-
ious elements of compensation for military personnel and imposed
certain requirements and limitations on personnel actions in the
defense establishment; (5) authorize appropriations for fiscal year
2021 for military construction and family housing; (6) authorize ap-
propriations for Overseas Contingency Operations; (7) authorize ap-
propriations for fiscal year 2021 for the Department of Energy na-
tional security programs; and (8) authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2021 for the Maritime Administration.
The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2021 is a key mechanism through which
Congress fulfills one of its primary responsibilities as mandated in
Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution of the United States, which
grants Congress the power to provide for the common defense, to
raise and support an Army, to provide and maintain a Navy, and
to make rules for the Government and regulation of the land and
naval forces. Rule X of the House of Representatives provides the
House Committee on Armed Services with jurisdiction over the De-
partment of Defense generally and over the military application of
nuclear energy. The bill includes the large majority of the findings
and recommendations resulting from its oversight activities, con-
ducted through hearings, briefings, and roundtable discussions
with Department of Defense and Department of Energy civilian
and military officials, intelligence analysts, outside experts, and in-
dustry representatives, and informed by the experience gained over
the previous decades of the committee’s existence.
LEGISLATION PASSED BY THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES
H.R. 2500—National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2020
On May 2, 2019, H.R. 2500, the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2020, was introduced by Chairman Adam Smith
and referred to the Committee on Armed Services. On June 12,
2019, the Committee on Armed Services held a markup session to
consider H.R. 2500. The committee ordered the bill H.R. 2500, as
amended, favorably reported to the House of Representatives by a
recorded vote of 33–24, a quorum being present. The bill passed the
House, as amended, on July 12, 2019, by recorded vote, 220–197
(Roll no. 473). On August 11, 2019, the bill was received in the
Senate, read twice, and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar
under General Orders Calendar No. 512. For further action on the
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, please
see Public Law 116–92.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
27
H. RES. 124—Expressing Opposition to Banning Service in the
Armed Forces by Openly Transgender Individuals
H. Res. 124, ‘‘Expressing opposition to banning service in the
Armed Forces by openly transgender individuals’’, was introduced
on February 11, 2019, by Representative Joseph P. Kennedy, III
and was referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and subse-
quently to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel. Pursuant to H.
Res. 252, H. Res. 124 was considered in the House under a closed
rule on March 28, 2019. H. Res. 252 provided for 1 hour of debate
on H. Res. 124 equally divided and controlled by the chair and
ranking minority member of the Committee on Armed Services. On
March 28, 2019, H. Res. 124 was agreed to in the House by the
yeas and nays: 238–185–1 (Roll no. 135).
H. RES. 413—Expressing the Immense Gratitude of the House of
Representatives for the Acts of Heroism, Valor, and Sacrifices
made by the Members of the United States Armed Forces and Al-
lied Armed Forces who Participated in the June 6, 1944, Amphib-
ious Landing at Normandy, France, and Commending those Indi-
viduals for their Leadership and Bravery in an Operation that
Helped bring an End to World War II
H. Res. 413, ‘‘Expressing the immense gratitude of the House of
Representatives for the acts of heroism, valor, and sacrifices made
by the members of the United States Armed Forces and allied
armed forces who participated in the June 6, 1944, amphibious
landing at Normandy, France, and commending those individuals
for their leadership and bravery in an operation that helped bring
an end to World War II’’, was introduced on May 30, 2019, by Rep-
resentative William R. Keating and was referred to the Committee
on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committees on Foreign
Affairs, and Veterans’ Affairs, for a period to be subsequently de-
termined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such
provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee con-
cerned. On May 31, 2019, the resolution was subsequently referred
to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel. On June 4, 2019, Rep-
resentative Keating asked unanimous consent that the Committee
on Armed Services be discharged from further consideration of the
resolution and for its immediate consideration in the House. There
was no objection to the request, and H. Res. 413 was agreed to in
the House by unanimous consent.
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES
OVERVIEW
Pursuant to clause 1(d) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, described below are actions taken and rec-
ommendations made with respect to specific areas and subjects
that were identified in the oversight plan for special attention dur-
ing the 116th Congress, as well as additional oversight activities
not explicitly enumerated by the oversight plan.
POLICY ISSUES
National Defense Strategy, National Military Strategy, and Related
Defense Policy Issues
During the 116th Congress, the committee continued to focus on
the readiness, capability, and capacity of the U.S. Armed Forces,
support for ongoing military operations, and the Department of De-
fense. The committee fulfilled its constitutional responsibilities pri-
marily by legislating the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92) and the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021.
The committee oversaw Department of Defense efforts to imple-
ment the National Defense Strategy and the National Military
Strategy during the 116th Congress. In doing so, the committee ex-
amined the broad strategic framework, including: strategic objec-
tives; relevant departmental policies, initiatives, and doctrines;
force structures; joint operational concepts; various organizational
matters; roles and missions; training and exercises; education; in-
vestments; the research and development of new technologies; mod-
ernization efforts; logistics; facilities and supporting infrastructure;
and industrial base matters; and the committee provided the re-
sources necessary to support strategic requirements.
The committee also continued to oversee: ongoing military oper-
ations; reassurance and deterrence activities; and Department of
Defense investments in capabilities, and infrastructure to address
current and emergent challenges. The committee informed its legis-
lative efforts and conducted oversight through hearings and brief-
ings; engagements with defense leaders, military commanders, dip-
lomats, academics, and private sector experts; and congressional
delegation visits to military installations and U.S. forces serving
abroad.
Deterrence
During the 116th Congress, the committee continued its over-
sight to ensure that U.S. defense posture and policy are structured
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
(29)
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
30
to effectively deter actors posing strategic challenges to the United
States, its allies, and partners. That included the ability of the
United States, in concert with allies and partners, to deter adver-
saries militarily and to counter efforts to weaken our shared val-
ues, undermine our systems of government, threaten international
norms, and disrupt the cohesion of our alliances and partnerships.
To that end, the committee conducted oversight, gathered informa-
tion, and legislated on issues critical to deterrence such as U.S. de-
fense capabilities, resources, and posture; implementation of the
National Defense Strategy; competition for influence and hybrid
warfare; security cooperation and assistance; and adaptation in a
dynamic and complex national security environment.
In particular, the committee’s activities in the 116th Congress
recognized the essential role that U.S. alliances and partnerships
play in maintaining global security and advancing U.S. national se-
curity objectives. For that reason, in the course of its legislative
and oversight activities, the committee pursued efforts to strength-
en U.S. alliances and partnerships, paid careful attention to the
state of U.S. relationships, and sought to respond deliberately and
effectively to adversary efforts to disrupt them.
Russia
Russia continues to maintain an aggressive global influence cam-
paign, particularly evident in Eastern Europe, the Middle East,
and Central Asia, but with far-reaching impacts worldwide. Rus-
sian military activity and its employment of unconventional and
conventional tactics, including efforts to disrupt the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization (NATO), malign activities in Afghanistan, on-
going aggression in Ukraine, increased naval activity, and in-
creased engagement in locations as disparate as Africa, Central
America, and the arctic, were important areas of concern for the
committee in the 116th Congress. The committee’s oversight has
concentrated on the U.S. military capabilities, capacity, posture,
and readiness needed to effectively maintain U.S. alliances and to
counter and deter Russia.
The European Deterrence Initiative (EDI), and the resources as-
sociated with it, was a significant area of oversight for the com-
mittee. The committee sought to ensure that the initiative was ap-
propriately resourced and implemented while taking substantial
steps to strengthen transparency, planning, and congressional over-
sight of the initiative. The committee also maintained oversight of
Department resources and tools allocated to ensure that U.S. force
posture in Europe is appropriate and continued to work on building
the capacity of Ukraine and other NATO allies and partners to
deter and defend against Russian aggression.
During the 116th Congress, the committee received several intel-
ligence and policy briefings on Russia’s military programs and ac-
tivities, its naval activity, its engagement in locations such as Afri-
ca, Central America, and the arctic, and Russia’s global influence
operations, including those aimed at disrupting elections, demo-
cratic institutions, and military partnerships and alliances, as well
as its ongoing aggression in Ukraine. On March 13, 2019, the com-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
mittee conducted a hearing titled ‘‘National Security Challenges
and U.S. Military Activities in Europe’’ to inform the committee re-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
31
garding the fiscal year 2020 budget request as it relates to the Eu-
ropean theater. On May 9, 2019, members of the committee re-
ceived a related briefing. On May 15, 2019, the committee received
a briefing on ‘‘Russian Federation’s Election Interference Efforts
and U.S. Responses.’’ On February 11, 2020, the committee held a
hearing with outside experts on ‘‘The Department of Defense’s Role
in Long-Term Major State Competition,’’ including competition
with Russia. On February 27, 2020, members of the committee re-
ceived a related briefing. On July 9, 2020, the committee received
a briefing on media reports of a Russian bounty program on U.S.
and Coalition service members in Afghanistan. On July 23, 2020,
members of the committee received a briefing on proposed force
structure changes in the European theater. On September 23,
2020, the committee held a hearing with outside experts on ‘‘The
Role of Allies and Partners in U.S. Military Strategy and Oper-
ations,’’ discussing the role of alliances in partnerships in deterring
Russia. On September 30, 2020, the committee held a hearing re-
garding ‘‘U.S. Defense Posture Changes in the European Theater,’’
assessing announced changes to U.S. military posture in Europe.
On October 1, 2020, the committee received a briefing on ‘‘Foreign
Election Interference Efforts’’ with relevant experts. Members and
staff also traveled to the U.S. European Command area of oper-
ations on multiple occasions to review and assess operations and
activities, including those related to Russia. These congressional
and staff delegations were preceded by operational and intelligence
oversight briefings to members and staff by senior officials from the
Department of Defense, the Department of State, and the intel-
ligence community.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116–92) contained several provisions to bolster the de-
terrence and defense capabilities of the United States and strength-
en collective deterrence with allies and partners in Europe, to in-
clude fully funding the EDI request at $5.7 billion and authorizing
an additional $734.3 million in funds for activities and capabilities
supporting European deterrence, as well as $300.0 million for secu-
rity assistance, equipment, and training to Ukrainian forces under
the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. Further, Public Law
116–92 established new oversight, planning, and transparency re-
quirements for EDI, including a requirement to display enhanced
fidelity in the contents of the EDI to Congress during budget sub-
missions, annual five-year planning for each EDI submission, and
subsequent yearly reporting to Congress on how EDI funds have
been used. Public Law 116–92 also expressed the sense of Congress
in strong support of the NATO alliance and prohibited the use of
funds to suspend, terminate, or file notice of withdrawal from the
North Atlantic Treaty until December 31, 2020. Public Law 116–
92 also limited military cooperation between the United States and
Russia, prohibited funds for activities recognizing the sovereignty
of the Russian Federation over Crimea, extended other security co-
operation authorities, and mandated sanctions related to construc-
tion of the Nord Stream II pipeline.
The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authoriza-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) contained several pro-
visions to strengthen deterrence measures, defense capabilities,
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
32
and enhance collective deterrence with U.S. partners and allies in
Europe, including fully funding the EDI request at $4.5 billion and
authorizing additional funds for activities and capabilities sup-
porting European deterrence, as well as $250.0 million for security
assistance, equipment, and training to Ukrainian forces under the
Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. Further, the FY21 NDAA
expressed the sense of Congress in support of NATO and limited
a reduction in the number of U.S. forces stationed in Germany
below 34,500 until 120 days after the Secretary of Defense submits
an assessment to Congress regarding costs, plans, and impacts re-
lated to a reduction. The FY21 NDAA also limited military coopera-
tion between the United States and Russia, prohibited funds for ac-
tivities recognizing the sovereignty of the Russian Federation over
Crimea, expanded and extended other security cooperation authori-
ties, required an assessment of U.S. military posture in South-
eastern Europe, extended the annual Russia Military Power Re-
port, established mandatory sanctions on Turkey for its acquisition
of the Russian S–400 air missile defense system as required by
CAATSA, and expanded sanctions related to construction of the
Nord Stream II pipeline.
Iran
Iran continued to project malign influence throughout the Middle
East region by threatening freedom of navigation in critical water-
ways, supporting terrorist organizations and proxy militias, illicit
cyber operations, developing and proliferating ballistic missiles,
and threatening to resume development of nuclear weapons fol-
lowing the United States’ withdrawal from the Joint Comprehen-
sive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
During the 116th Congress, the committee received briefings on
Iran’s military capabilities and malign activities throughout the re-
gion. The committee conducted oversight of the Department’s ef-
forts to deter Iran’s destabilizing activities throughout the U.S.
Central Command area of responsibility. Additionally, the com-
mittee conducted oversight of U.S. Central Command’s force pos-
ture, readiness, and activities with respect to Iran and other re-
gional threats. On December 13, 2019, the committee received a
briefing on the Department’s policies toward Iran and Saudi Ara-
bia. On January 29, 2020, the committee received a briefing on the
Department’s policies toward Iran. On March 7, 2019, the com-
mittee held a hearing on U.S. national security challenges in the
Middle East and Africa titled ‘‘National Security Challenges and
U.S. Military Activities in the Greater Middle East and Africa’’. On
March 10, 2020, the committee held a hearing on the same subject
titled ‘‘National Security Challenges and U.S. Military Activities in
the Greater Middle East and Africa’’. Members and staff traveled
to the U.S. Central Command area of operations on multiple occa-
sions to review and assess operations and activities, including
those related to Iran. These congressional and staff delegations
were preceded by operational and intelligence oversight briefings to
members and staff by senior officials from the Department of De-
fense, the Department of State, and the intelligence community. Fi-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
nally, the committee received numerous staff-level briefings on De-
partment of Defense programs and activities related to Iran.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
33
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116–92) contained provisions that required a report
studying the effect of lifting the United Nations arms embargo on
Iran, and a report on Iranian activities related to nuclear prolifera-
tion. The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Author-
ization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY 21 NDAA) contains a provision
requiring activity and budget information on Operation Spartan
Shield, a U.S. Central Command operation that includes some Iran
deterrence activities. In the conference report accompanying the FY
21 NDAA, the conferees required a report examining the threat
posed by Iran-backed militias in Iraq to Iraq and U.S. forces.
The People’s Republic of China
The People’s Republic of China continues its efforts to assert in-
fluence, modernize its military, and take steps that erode security
norms, increasing the risk of conflict, particularly in the South and
East China Seas. The committee continued to conduct oversight of
the Department’s response to China’s efforts to extend its military
reach and invest in its military forces. At the same time, the com-
mittee also continued to conduct oversight of the Department’s
military posture, force structure, and force readiness efforts, and
plans to enhance capabilities, forward presence, posture, and train-
ing and exercises to deter and counter acts of aggression and pro-
tect vital U.S. and ally and partner interests.
During the 116th Congress, the committee received briefings on
China’s military strategy and capabilities, and influence operations,
including those aimed at disrupting elections, democratic institu-
tions, and military alliances and partnerships, as well as U.S. mili-
tary posture, readiness, and partnership initiatives to deter such
activities. On March 12, 2019, the committee received a briefing on
China’s military power and U.S. military activities in the Indo-Pa-
cific. On March 27, 2019, the committee held a hearing titled ‘‘Na-
tional Security Challenges and U.S. Military Activities in the Indo-
Pacific.’’ On January 15, 2020, the committee held a hearing with
outside experts on ‘‘DOD’s Role in Competition with China.’’ On
February 11, 2020, the committee held a hearing with outside ex-
perts on ‘‘The Department of Defense’s Role in Long-Term Major
State Competition,’’ including competition with China. On May 13,
2020, the committee held a briefing via conference call on national
security challenges in the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command Area of Op-
erations. On September 9, 2020, the committee held a hearing with
outside experts on ‘‘The Role of Allies and Partners in U.S. Military
Strategy and Operations,’’ discussing the role of alliances in part-
nerships in deterring China. Members and staff traveled to the
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command area of operations on multiple occa-
sions to review and assess operations and activities, including
those related to China. These congressional and staff delegations
were preceded by operational and intelligence oversight briefings to
members and staff by senior officials from the Department of De-
fense, the Department of State, and the intelligence community.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116–92) contained several provisions to bolster the ca-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
pacity and defense capabilities of the United States and partners
and allies in the Indo-Pacific. Public Law 116–92 required an as-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
34
sessment from the Commander of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command on
the resource requirements to implement the National Defense
Strategy in the region, modified the annual report on military and
security development involving the People’s Republic of China, and
modified and expanding the Maritime Security Initiative to include
twelve additional nations.
The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) contained several pro-
visions to strengthen deterrence measures, defense capabilities,
and enhance collective deterrence with U.S. partners and allies in
the Indo-Pacific. The FY 21 NDAA established a Pacific Deterrence
Initiative to enhance the U.S. deterrence and defense posture in
the Indo-Pacific region, assure allies and partners of an enduring
U.S. commitment to the Indo-Pacific, and enhance Congress’s abil-
ity to conduct oversight on U.S. military activities in the region.
The Initiative authorized $2.2 billion in activities for Fiscal Year
2021. Further, the FY21 NDAA reinforced the United States com-
mitment to a rules-based international order by modifying and ex-
tending the Department of Defense Freedom of Navigation Report
and authorized the establishment of a Movement Coordination
Center Pacific to synchronize lift capabilities of partner nations in
the Indo-Pacific. The FY21 NDAA also expanded prohibitions on
the U.S. defense supply chain, and required an assessment of the
National Cyber Strategy to deter China from engaging in industrial
espionage and cyber theft.
The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea continues to pose a
threat to the Korean Peninsula, the United States, and U.S. forces,
allies, and partners in East Asia. While North Korea has not con-
ducted a nuclear test since 2017, North Korea advanced its ballistic
missile program by conducting multiple tests in 2019 and 2020.
The committee continued to oversee the Department of Defense’s
efforts to implement a range of posture, force structure, and force
readiness initiatives; infrastructure and force realignments, includ-
ing U.S.-Republic of Korea Special Measures Agreements consulta-
tions; and bilateral and multilateral training and exercises.
During the 116th Congress, the committee received briefings on
the security threats posed by North Korea, as well as U.S. military
posture, readiness, and partnership initiatives to deter such activi-
ties. On February 13, 2019, the committee received a briefing on
North Korea and U.S. military readiness on the Korean Peninsula.
On March 27, 2019, held a hearing titled ‘‘National Security Chal-
lenges and U.S. Military Activities in the Indo-Pacific’’, including
challenges posed by North Korea. On January 28, 2020, the com-
mittee held a hearing, ‘‘XXX,’’ to receive a security update on the
Korean Peninsula. On May 20, 2020, the committee held a briefing
via conference call on national security challenges on the Korean
Peninsula. On September 9, 2020, the committee held a hearing
with outside experts on ‘‘The Role of Allies and Partners in U.S.
Military Strategy and Operations,’’ discussing the role of alliances
in partnerships, including those deterring North Korea. Members
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
and staff traveled to the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command area of oper-
ations on multiple occasions to review and assess operations and
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
35
activities, including those related to North Korea. These congres-
sional and staff delegations were preceded by operational and intel-
ligence oversight briefings to members and staff by senior officials
from the Department of Defense, the Department of State, and the
intelligence community.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116–92) contained several provisions to strengthen de-
terrence measures, partnerships and collective deterrence against
threats posed by North Korea. Public Law 116–92 prohibited the
use of funds to reduce the number of active duty U.S. forces in
South Korea below 28,500 until 90 days after the Secretary of De-
fense certifies that such a reduction is in the national security in-
terest of the United States, will not significant undermine the secu-
rity interest of allies in the region, and that the Secretary has ap-
propriately consulted with U.S. allies, including South Korea and
Japan. Further, Public Law 116–92 required the Comptroller Gen-
eral to report on the direct, indirect, and burden-sharing contribu-
tions of South Korea and Japan. Public Law 116–92 also imposed
secondary-banking sanctions and primary trade-based sanctions on
North Korea and foreign persons involved with North Korea, and
increased congressional oversight on enforcement of sanctions and
North Korean sanctions evasion efforts.
The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) contained several pro-
visions to strengthen deterrence measures and enhance collective
deterrence with U.S. partners and allies in East Asia. The FY21
NDAA established a Pacific Deterrence Initiative to reassure U.S.
allies and partners of an enduring commitment to the Indo-Pacific
and to enhance Congress’ ability to conduct oversight on U.S. mili-
tary activities in the region. The Initiative authorized $2.2 billion
in activities for Fiscal Year 2021. Further, the FY21 NDAA also
prohibited the use of funds to reduce the number of active duty
U.S. forces in South Korea below 28,500 until 90 days after the
Secretary of Defense certifies that such a reduction is in the na-
tional security interest of the United States, will not significant un-
dermine the security interest of allies in the region, and that the
Secretary has appropriately consulted with U.S. allies, including
South Korea and Japan.
Strategic Deterrence Issues
The committee also conducted oversight of issues related to stra-
tegic deterrence. With regard to nuclear deterrence, the committee
conducted oversight of nuclear deterrence policy and posture. This
oversight included a full committee hearing on ‘‘Outside Perspec-
tives on Nuclear Deterrence’’ on March 6, 2019. This oversight in-
cluded examining the role of nuclear weapons and options for nu-
clear deterrence; options to reduce the risk of miscalculation that
could lead to nuclear war in a crisis and reduce the risk of a nu-
clear arms race or a lowered threshold to nuclear weapons use; and
options to maintain credible nuclear extended deterrence. In order
to understand the threat environment driving U.S. modernization
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
efforts, the committee also conducted several classified briefings on
the nuclear weapons programs of several foreign countries.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
36
Countering Terrorism
Countering terrorism remains a central focus and mission of the
Department of Defense. U.S. Armed Forces have deployed around
the globe to confront al-Qaida, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria
(ISIS), and other, associated terrorist groups. While these terrorist
groups have been degraded, some have continued to present a
threat to the United States.
During the 116th Congress, the committee continued its over-
sight efforts to ensure that the posture and policies of the Depart-
ment of Defense are properly structured, resourced, and aligned to
effectively counter terrorist and violent extremist organizations
that threaten the United States, its allies, and partners. This in-
cluded examining the planning for and execution of counterter-
rorism operations, security cooperation to strengthen the counter-
terrorism capabilities and practices of partners and allies, and de-
tention policy related to counterterrorism.
The committee received briefings on a range of threats to U.S.
equities and the Department’s activities and capabilities related to
combatting terrorism, deterring threats, and countering extremism.
Further, on February 6, 2019, the committee held a hearing on the
Department’s approach to counterterrorism titled ‘‘Evaluation of
the Department of Defense’s Counterterrorism Approach’’. In re-
gions, like Africa, the committee examined our commitment to our
partners support efforts to bolster our partners’ capacity to disrupt
violent extremist organizations and, on March 7, 2019, and March
10, 2020, the committee received testimony on efforts to address se-
curity threats in the USAFRICOM theater during hearings titled
‘‘National Security Challenges and U.S. Military Activities in the
Greater Middle East and Africa.’’
Members and staff traveled to various combatant command areas
of operations to review and assess operations and activities, includ-
ing those related to counterterrorism. These congressional and staff
delegations were preceded by operational and intelligence oversight
briefings to members and staff by senior officials from the Depart-
ment of Defense, the Department of State, and the intelligence
community. Finally, the committee received numerous staff-level
briefings on Department of Defense programs and activities related
to counterterrorism activities and authorities.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116–92) prohibited the Department from knowingly
providing weapons and support to several named terrorist groups.
The committee continued to conduct oversight of the Department’s
authority to provide support to foreign forces, irregular forces,
groups, or individuals engaged in supporting ongoing military oper-
ations to combat terrorism. In the conference report accompanying
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (H.
Rept. 116–333), the conferees required a report from the Depart-
ment examining the relationship between Hizballah and the Leba-
nese Armed Forces.
The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) would prohibit the De-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
partment from knowingly providing weapons and support to sev-
eral named terrorist groups. It would modify and extend the au-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
37
thority to support border security operations of certain foreign
countries.
Further, the committee continued its oversight of detainee policy,
including detainees held at the United States Naval Station, Guan-
tanamo Bay, Cuba (GTMO), as well as detainees held in areas of
operations.
With respect to detainees held at GTMO, the committee contin-
ued to conduct oversight regarding detention policies and practices,
as well as the application of the Military Commissions Act (Public
Law 109–366; Public Law 111–84). The committee conducted travel
to GTMO. The committee also received numerous staff briefings re-
garding conditions at GTMO, including briefings related to medical
care and the COVID–19 pandemic. The National Defense Author-
ization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92) extended
until December 31, 2020, prohibitions on the transfer of GTMO de-
tainees to the United States, the construction or modification of fa-
cilities in the United States to house GTMO detainees, closure or
relinquishment of U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay and the
transfer of GTMO detainees to Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen.
Public Law 116–92 also established a Chief Medical Officer to over-
see health care decisions at GTMO. The FY21 NDAA would further
extend the prohibitions related to detainee transfers, construction,
and relinquishment of U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay until
December 31, 2021.
Operation Freedom’s Sentinel
The committee continued its robust oversight of the U.S. military
effort in Afghanistan with a focus on the Administration’s South
Asia Strategy, the ability to measure progress on U.S. objectives in
Afghanistan and the region, the Agreement for Bringing Peace to
Afghanistan, and reductions of military personnel from Afghani-
stan. The committee extended its related oversight activities on the
U.S.-led Operation Freedom’s Sentinel counterterrorism mission
and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Resolute Support Mis-
sion (NATO–RSM) to train, advise, and assist the Afghan National
Defense and Security Forces (ANDSF). Additionally, the committee
examined the regional security environment focusing on Pakistan,
other neighboring countries, and the international community. Spe-
cifically, the committee scrutinized the Department of Defense’s ac-
tivities to deny safe havens for the Taliban, al-Qaida, the Haqqani
Network, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria-Khorasan, and other
extremist organizations; support for the Government of Afghani-
stan’s security efforts; NATO and other troop contributing coun-
tries’ support for NATO–RSM; and assessments of Russian influ-
ence and its possible impacts on Afghanistan’s security.
During both sessions of the 116th Congress, the committee held
numerous events related to the U.S. military mission in Afghani-
stan. At hearings on March 7, 2019, and March 10, 2020, titled
‘‘National Security Challenges and U.S. Military Activities in the
Greater Middle East and Africa’’, the committee received testimony
about the U.S. military mission in Afghanistan. The committee also
received a briefing on the U.S. military mission in Afghanistan, the
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
implications for the South Asia Strategy, and the way ahead. On
April 23, 2020, the committee conducted a briefing for members
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
38
and staff entitled, ‘‘Update on the U.S. military mission in Afghani-
stan and the status of the U.S. Agreement to bring peace to Af-
ghanistan,’’ with officials from the Department of Defense and De-
partment of State. The committee also held a briefing on media re-
ports of a Russian bounty program on U.S. and Coalition service
members in Afghanistan, following reports that Russia provided fi-
nancial incentives to the Taliban to target U.S. and Coalition serv-
ice members in Afghanistan. The committee also held a hearing on
November 20, 2020, with non-governmental witnesses on the situa-
tion in Afghanistan, U.S. policy and military strategy, and the im-
plications of the peace process on Afghanistan and U.S. involve-
ment there. Officials from the Department of Defense, Department
of State, and the intelligence community provided numerous addi-
tional briefings to committee members and staff. Additionally, com-
mittee members and staff traveled to Afghanistan and the region
on multiple occasions to meet with U.S., Coalition, and Afghan offi-
cials, service members, and regional civilian and military leaders.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116–92) continued the authority of the Afghan Secu-
rity Forces Fund to support the ANDSF, including the Afghan Air
Force and the Afghan Special Operations Forces. It also modified
the Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009 (8 U.S.C. 1101) to increase
the number of authorized visas for Afghans who supported U.S. op-
erations by 4,000 and returned primary applicant eligibly criteria
for the visas to those specified in the original 2009 law.
The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) continues to authorize
the Afghan Security Forces Fund to support the ANDSF. The FY21
NDAA also includes further oversight of the Intra-Afghan Negotia-
tions by requiring the Secretary of State, in consultation with the
Secretary of Defense, to submit materials relevant to the ‘‘Agree-
ment for Bringing Peace to Afghanistan,’’ as well as any subse-
quent agreements. The FY21 NDAA would also extend existing au-
thorities and would modify certain Department of Defense and De-
partment of State reporting requirements to improve congressional
oversight of programs and activities in Afghanistan. The FY21
NDAA also requires a detailed budgetary breakdown of Operation
Freedom’s Sentinel costs in Afghanistan and limits the use of funds
to reduce the military personnel in Afghanistan to less than 2,000
without first submitting a report to Congress.
Pakistan
The committee recognizes that Pakistan remains an important,
albeit imperfect, counterterrorism partner to the United States.
The committee continued to conduct oversight on the broad range
of security issues involving Pakistan, including the security of
Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, Pakistan’s on-going and future nuclear
weapon projects, regional tensions with India, and the positive role
Pakistan has played in the recent Intra-Afghan Negotiations. More-
over, the committee evaluated the terrorist activity emanating from
the border area between Pakistan and Afghanistan and conducted
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
oversight of the Department of Defense’s efforts to combat the
threat.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
39
During both sessions of the 116th Congress, events related to the
U.S. military mission in Afghanistan involved discussions about
Pakistan. These events updated the committee on Pakistan, its
positive role in the Afghan peace process and the security situation
within the country.
Operation Inherent Resolve
As part of Operation Inherent Resolve, U.S. and coalition forces
continue to advise, train, and equip our partners against the Is-
lamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). The committee recognizes that
the security landscape in Iraq and Syria continues to be complex.
During the 116th Congress, the committee conducted oversight to
assess the sufficiency of authorities, resources, equipment, basing,
and personnel to support the Operation Inherent Resolve mission
and policy objectives. The committee conducted oversight of the
Counter-ISIS Train and Equip programs and their effectiveness,
monitored the stability of the countries in the region and capability
of ISIS, and oversaw the authorities and resources provided to ad-
dress these challenges. The committee examined the presence and
influence exerted by other actors in Syria, particularly Russia,
Iran, and Turkey, and the implications for U.S. objectives regard-
ing ISIS and regional security and stability.
During the 116th Congress, the committee held hearings on Op-
eration Inherent Resolve and the Department of Defense’s efforts
to work with regional partners to address ISIS. On March 7, 2019,
the committee received testimony on national security challenges
and U.S. military activities in the Middle East and Africa in a
hearing titled ‘‘National Security Challenges and U.S. Military Ac-
tivities in the Greater Middle East and Africa’’. On December 11,
2019, the committee received testimony on U.S. policy in Syria and
the broader region in a hearing titled ‘‘U.S. Policy in Syria and the
Broader Region’’. On March 10, 2020, the committee received testi-
mony on national security challenges and U.S. military activities in
the Middle East and Africa in a hearing titled ‘‘National Security
Challenges and U.S. Military Activities in the Greater Middle East
and Africa’’. In addition, the committee regularly received briefings
from Department of Defense, Department of State, and intelligence
community officials regarding Operation Inherent Resolve and se-
curity threats related to the region.
Members and staff traveled to the U.S. Central Command area
of operations to review and assess operations and activities, includ-
ing those related to Operation Inherent Resolve. These congres-
sional and staff delegations were preceded by operational and intel-
ligence oversight briefings to members and staff by senior officials
from the Department of Defense, the Department of State, and the
intelligence community. Finally, the committee received numerous
staff-level briefings on Department of Defense programs and activi-
ties related to Operation Inherent Resolve.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116–92) extended and modified the authority, and au-
thorized the appropriation of funds, to support the Iraqi security
forces and vetted Syrian groups and individuals in the fight against
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
ISIS. It modified and extended the authorities of the Office of Secu-
rity Cooperation-Iraq (OSC–I) to support operations and activities.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
40
It included the CAESAR Syria Sanctions, which targeted the Assad
regime’s military. In the conference report accompanying the Na-
tional Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (H. Rept.
116–333), the conferees expressed support for the Ministry of
Peshmerga forces of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq.
The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) extends and modifies
the authority, and would authorize the appropriation of funds, to
support the Iraqi security forces and vetted Syrian groups and indi-
viduals in the fight against ISIS. It would modify and extend the
authorities of OSC–I to support operations and activities. In the
conference report accompanying the William M. (Mac) Thornberry
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (H. Rept.
116–617), the conferees required a report from the Department on
the threat posed by Iran-backed militias in Iraq to Iraq and U.S.
military forces.
Nuclear Non-Proliferation
The committee continued to monitor the National Nuclear Secu-
rity Administration Defense Nuclear Non-proliferation activities.
The threat of nuclear weapons-grade material, technology, and
know-how remains a threat to the United States, particularly in
light of new technological developments that may complicate the
cost and the ability to detect such activity. The spread of nuclear
weapons and nuclear weapons-usable materials remain a grave
threat to the United States, and as such, the committee authorized
increased funding for Defense Nuclear Non-proliferation programs
in both the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2020 (Public Law 116–92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021. Con-
sistent with its oversight plan for the 116th Congress, the com-
mittee supported leveraging new technologies and opportunities,
and included a provision in Public Law 116–92 requiring a Na-
tional Academy of Sciences review of U.S. capabilities for detection,
verification, and monitoring of nuclear weapons and fissile mate-
rial, and recommendations for improving these capabilities.
Emerging Threats, Security Cooperation, and Other Issues
The United States faces a complex array of threats to national
security. State and non-state actors are increasingly leveraging op-
portunities to pose new and evolving threats, particularly in the
realm of space, cyberspace, proliferation of weapons of mass de-
struction, high performance computing, and other emerging and
disruptive technologies. Furthermore, threats to national security
are no longer isolated to state or non-state actors. Infectious dis-
ease outbreaks and the extreme weather events associated with a
changing climate threaten security and stability around the globe
and have significance for U.S. national security as well as military
operations. Partners and allies remain an integral part of address-
ing U.S. national security challenges. During the 116th Congress,
the committee conducted oversight of numerous cross-cutting De-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
partment of Defense activities central to addressing these emerging
threats. Further, the committee conducted oversight of security co-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
41
operation and other efforts to strengthen relationships with part-
ners and allies.
Emerging Threats
During the 116th Congress, the committee conducted oversight of
numerous cross-cutting Department of Defense activities central to
addressing these emerging and unforeseen threats. Elsewhere in
this report is further discussion of such activities conducted by the
Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and Capabili-
ties.
The committee conducted numerous briefings with the Depart-
ment to assess the response to the pandemic. In particular, the
committee established a series of briefings with senior leaders in
the Department and the services to coordinate the response to the
new stresses and demands that the pandemic placed on the De-
partment, including the defense industrial base and its supply
chains, and to examine policy options for defending against poten-
tial vulnerabilities. Through these briefings, the committee sought
timely, detailed information on the activity of the Department and
its contractors, including the Department’s acquisition-related sup-
port to other Federal departments and agencies. They also in-
formed the committee’s legislative efforts, including to align strate-
gically the tools of industrial policy—including most prominently
the Defense Production Act—with the needs of the warfighters and
the supporting establishment.
The committee also continues to recognize national security
threats facing the country stem from grey zone activities (e.g.,
disinformation campaigns and fake news, cyber espionage, and
election meddling and political interference) that occur below the
level of armed conflict and yet can yield significant damage. The
committee is concerned that the Department is not fully syn-
chronized in its efforts to confront these threats. To that end, the
committee conducted a series of meetings and briefings, some of
which were classified, on topics ranging from technologies to
counter unmanned aircraft systems to the sensitive issue of
elecromagnetic spectrum management to a series of technical brief-
ings on election security.
Security Cooperation
The committee conducted oversight of security cooperation, build-
ing partner capacity programs, and examined the importance of
partners and allies in the 116th Congress. The committee focused
on efforts to build partner capacity and strong partnerships as a
means to help deter malign influence by China and Russia and fur-
ther U.S. national security objectives. Activities included oversight
of the Department’s activities in theaters where U.S. presence and
security assistance helps counter investments by China and Russia.
On September 23, 2020, the committee held a hearing entitled,
‘‘The Role of Allies and Partners in U.S. Military Strategy and Op-
erations,’’ which examined the network of alliances and partner-
ships related to defense and opportunities to strengthen security
relationships. In support of our partnerships, the committee also
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
conducted oversight visits to countries such as Tunisia, Niger, and
Mali where security partnerships and presence can help promote
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
42
stability and combat extremist threats from ISIS and al-Qaida. In
the conference report accompanying the William M. (Mac) Thorn-
berry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (H.
Rept. 116–617), the conferees required a report that would identify
opportunities to increase security partnerships with African coun-
tries.
Further, the committee continues to monitor and evaluate the
implementation of comprehensive reforms to security cooperation
provisions made during the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114–328) to ensure that they are suf-
ficient to meet requirements, properly executed, and consistent
with national security objectives. Members conducted oversight vis-
its to countries in the regions to assess the sufficiency of resources
available in these regions to help better inform the Department’s
allocation of resources to key partners and allies.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116–92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry Na-
tional Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 contained
multiple provisions to adjust security cooperation authorities to
evolving requirements and enhance congressional oversight of such
authorities.
Other Issues
Additionally, during the 116th Congress emphasized the need for
whole of government approaches and partner adherence to shared
democratic values and human rights. The committee also received
briefings and reports on the Department’s assistance provided to
countries’ participating in humanitarian relief efforts for Ven-
ezuela. In the conference report accompanying the William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021 (H. Rept. 116–617), the conferees noted the importance
of a sustained commitment to cooperative efforts, protection of civil-
ians and adherence to human rights in this region by providing en-
hanced oversight on equipment certification and requiring a review
of the sufficiency of resources to the Human Rights Office at South-
ern Command. In H. Rept. 116–617, the conferees encouraged the
Department to continue to prevent and respond to civilian harm in
the Sahel.
During a February 26, 2020, hearing entitled, ‘‘The Fiscal Year
2021 National Defense Authorization Budget Request from the De-
partment of Defense’’ the committee examined challenges to re-
sources, force protection and posture and was briefed on the De-
partment’s review of the combatant commands and plans to reposi-
tion troops on the continent and the merger between US Army Af-
rica and US Army Europe.
The committee also examined illicit trafficking and transnational
organized crime issues globally, particularly counterdrug efforts in
Central and South America. The committee conducted hearings on
military activities in the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility and re-
ceived briefings from staff. The committee held a hearing on March
11, 2020, titled ‘‘National Security Challenges and U.S. Military ac-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
tivity in North and South America.’’ Other oversight activities such
as travel ensured that the committee understood instability in the
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
43
Northern Triangle and the threats to the region and their impact
on the homeland.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116–92) also prohibited in-flight refueling to non-U.S.
aircraft engaged in hostilities in the civil war in Yemen. It also re-
quired a report from the Department examining the impact of
Saudi-led coalition airstrikes on civilian casualties in Yemen. The
William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2021 includes provisions that requires reports from
the Department and from the Government Accountability Office ex-
amining the impact of U.S. security assistance to the Saudi-led coa-
lition in its conflict in Yemen against the Houthis. It would also in-
clude a statement of policy on Yemen.
Organization and Management of the Department of Defense
During the 116th Congress, the committee oversaw the organiza-
tion and management of the Department of Defense, and it legis-
lated substantial organizational changes through the National De-
fense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92)
and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2021. Prominent organizational changes in-
cluded: the establishment of the United States Space Force as a
separate armed force within the Department of the Air Force; the
establishment of a Chief Diversity Officer within the Department
of Defense; adjustments to the position of Chief Information Officer
of the Department of Defense; the establishment of an Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy; the establishment
of an Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and
Environment; and the establishment of Assistant Secretaries for
Energy, Installations, and Environment in each of the Departments
of the Army, the Navy and the Air Force; and the disestablishment
of the position of Chief Management Officer of the Department of
Defense.
Homeland Defense
During the 116th Congress, the committee continued its over-
sight of the missions and capabilities of U.S. Northern Command
and the Department of Defense’s Homeland Defense and Global Se-
curity directorate. This section covers integration of response plan-
ning and exercises, as well as requests for support from other de-
partments and agencies, Defense Support of Civil Authorities, as
well as the Department’s integration and support to domestic crises
response. Elsewhere, the activities report covers other aspects of
homeland defense such as cyber operations, Cooperative Threat Re-
duction, nuclear issues, and intermediate and long-range missile
defense systems.
During the 116th Congress, the committee conducted oversight
and received hearings and briefings on a range of topics focused on
homeland defense issues, particularly on the Department of De-
fense’s support to the Department of Homeland Security at the
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
southern land border of the United States, COVID–19 pandemic
support, and support to civilian law enforcement.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
44
Support to the Southern Border
During both sessions of the 116th Congress, the committee re-
ceived numerous briefings on the mission, scope, authorities, dura-
tion, efficacy, and cost of U.S. border support operations from De-
partment of Defense officials. On January 29, 2019, the committee
held a hearing entitled, ‘‘Department of Defense’s Support to the
Southern Border.’’ On May 1, 2019, and March 11, 2020, the com-
mittee held hearings titled ‘‘National Security Challenges and U.S.
Military Activity in North and South America’’ to inform the com-
mittee regarding the fiscal year budget request as it relates to
Northern Command and to the Department of Defense’s support to
the Department of Homeland Security at the southern border.
Members and staff also traveled to the southern border of the
United States on multiple occasions to review and assess Depart-
ment of Defense operations and activities.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116–92) contained a provision that directed the Sec-
retary of Defense to transmit requests for assistance received from
the Department of Homeland Security or the Department of Health
and Human Services electronically no later than 7 calendar days
after receiving those requests as well as the Secretary’s response
to any such request to the committee. This has provided Congress
greater oversight into what support requests the Department of
Defense is receiving as well as which ones they support and how
they will provide that support.
The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) contained a provision
that would modify and expand section 1059 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114–92) to pro-
vide more detailed information on military support to Department
of Homeland Security along the southern border. The modification
would require the Department of Defense to ensure that support to
the border will not affect military readiness and would modify the
reporting requirement to include a description of the assistance,
the units (Active Duty and National Guard) that provide the assist-
ance, the length of military deployments, the mission of these per-
sonnel by location, and the financial cost of the support.
COVID–19 Pandemic
During the second session of the 116th Congress, the committee
received regular briefings on how the Department of Defense is
providing force protection during the COVID–19 pandemic, and re-
ceived updates on COVID–19 testing, research, and vaccine devel-
opment; the COVID–19 pandemic response from the Department of
Navy; and how Department of Defense is leveraging the Defense
Production Act and supporting the Defense Industrial Base during
COVID–19. The committee also received a briefing from the Na-
tional Center for Medical Intelligence on COVID–19. On June 10,
2020, the committee held a hearing entitled ‘‘Department of De-
fense COVID–19 Response to Defense Industrial Base Challenges.’’
The Subcommittee on Military Personnel also held briefings with
subject matter experts in infectious disease and global health to
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
discuss military Force Health Protection related to COVID–19 on
May 21, 2020, and the progress of the COVID–19 Task Force on
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
45
September 11, 2020. These events were essential for the committee
to better understand the origins of the pandemic, the pandemic’s
effect on the U.S. military and the military industrial base, as well
as the Department’s role in Operation Warp Speed.
The FY21 NDAA contained a variety of provisions that would au-
thorize funding to strengthen Department of Defense and the coun-
try’s ability to respond to a potential COVID–19 resurgence and
other infectious diseases in the future.
Support to Civilian Law Enforcement
During the second session of the 116th Congress, the committee
received several briefings and testimony from the Department of
Defense on its support of civilian law enforcement’s civil unrest ac-
tivities. The committee received testimony from Department of De-
fense on July 9, 2020, at a hearing entitled, ‘‘Department of De-
fense Authorities and Roles Related to Civilian Law Enforcement.’’
These events provided the committee a better understanding of the
Department of Defense’s support to civil law enforcement, existing
authorities, and limitations.
The FY21 NDAA contained a provision that would require active
duty, National Guard, and Federal law enforcement personnel who
are providing support to Federal authorities in response to a civil
disturbance to display visibly: (1) the individual’s name or other
identifier unique to that individual; and (2) the name of the Fed-
eral law enforcement agency, Armed Force, or other organization of
which such individual is a member. This provides for greater trans-
parency and understanding when military personnel are used in
support of civil authorities.
Acquisition
In the 116th Congress, the committee continued its ongoing ef-
fort to improve the agility of the Department of Defense acquisition
system and the environment driving acquisition choices in the De-
partment, industry, and Congress. Through its oversight function,
the committee continued to monitor the efforts of the Department,
and particularly the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition
and Sustainment, to implement recent statutory changes and rec-
ommendations of commissioned reports. The committee placed a
priority on accountability and integrity in contracting. In devel-
oping policy, the committee continued to solicit input from indus-
try, academia, the Department, and other stakeholders.
The committee conducted events to receive testimony from key
leaders and experts. Committee staff travelled to discuss key issues
with partners and allies and also participated in events for mem-
bers of government, industry, academia, and investment commu-
nities, including a discussion platform for fast-paced technology.
In response to the pandemic, the committee also established re-
curring weekly staff briefings by Department senior leaders on the
response to the public health crisis to ensure the appropriate, effec-
tive, and efficient use of the Department’s significant financial re-
sources and contracting flexibilities provided in the Families First
Coronavirus Relief Act and the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Eco-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
nomic Security (CARES) Act (Public Law 116–136). Further, on
June 10, 2020, the committee held a hearing entitled ‘‘DOD
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
46
COVID–19 Response to Defense Industrial Base Challenges,’’ which
discussed the Department’s efforts in ramping up production capac-
ity of key public health needs pursuant to Defense Production Act
authority, while expanding the defense industrial base’s (DIB) ca-
pabilities and ensuring the health and security of companies in the
DIB. The testimony also highlighted the Department’s significant
role in providing acquisition expertise to other federal agencies
tasked with major pandemic-related acquisition projects. The com-
mittee also received a briefing on September 11, 2020, providing an
update on defense industrial policy efforts to maintain a supply
chain for medical supplies and to shore up firms in the DIB.
Acquisition Policy and Issues
Consistent with its oversight plan for the 116th Congress, the
committee expanded its efforts to improve the agility of the Depart-
ment’s acquisition system. Through legislation and oversight, the
committee monitored and guided the efforts of the Department, and
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment,
to execute its responsibilities to deliver effective, reliable, and af-
fordable solutions to the warfighters. Beginning in early 2020, the
committee applied these efforts with particular vigor in response to
the coronavirus pandemic. The committee supported the Depart-
ment’s rapid response to acquisition issues and needs that the pan-
demic presented, enabling the Under Secretary for Acquisition and
Sustainment to surge acquisition resources and expertise to other
Government agencies, while simultaneously protecting the health
and security of the DIB.
The committee also emphasized the importance of accountability
and integrity in the contracting process. Reports of misbehavior by
some contractors underscored the value of transparency in the data
used to determine fair and reasonable prices for goods and services.
Transparency, coupled with rigorous oversight, preserves the abil-
ity of the Government to negotiate effectively. The committee
worked to equip the Department with contracting tools and legal
authorities, and encouraged the Department to deploy those tools
and authorities, to ensure that contractors meet high standards of
ethics and responsibility.
The committee took action to enable the Defense acquisition sys-
tem to respond quickly to emerging and potential threats from ad-
versaries. The committee’s careful approach to the requirements,
acquisition, budget, and oversight processes emphasized that in-
vestments in innovation must be paired with broader support for
sustainment activities. The committee supported multiple initia-
tives for innovative approaches to acquisition and modernization
while also pressing the Department to adopt a more systematic,
strategic approach to sustainment, to ensure that both aspects of
the Acquisition and Sustainment enterprise receive appropriate at-
tention.
Industrial base resiliency and supply chain security are critical
to the Department’s ability to accomplish its missions. Accordingly,
the committee took legislative action to improve the Department’s
ability to assess and mitigate risks to its supply chains by: modern-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
izing risk assessment and mitigation; strengthening and
prioritizing efforts to address key industrial base vulnerabilities;
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
47
collaborating effectively with allies and partners; improving insight
into and mitigation of risks presented by foreign ownership, con-
trol, and influence of contractors; enhancing transparency of bene-
ficial ownership of contractors; reducing reliance on potentially vul-
nerable sources of strategic and critical materials; and expanding
incentives for trusted sources of semiconductors and other critical
microelectronics. In its oversight capacity, the committee ensured
that the Department implemented a careful, risk-based approach to
implementing the prohibition on certain telecommunications equip-
ment, consistent with section 889 of the John S. McCain National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–
292).
The committee incorporated several provisions in the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–
92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Au-
thorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) aimed at im-
proving efficiency and effectiveness in the acquisition process.
Some provisions of note in Public Law 116–92 and the FY21 NDAA
include:
(1) Investing in the Workforce: The committee made significant
progress in strengthening the acquisition workforce. Public Law
116–92 required the Department to redesign the Acquisition Work-
force certification, education, and career fields by leveraging na-
tionally and internationally recognized standards. It also estab-
lished a Defense Civilian Training Corps to address critical skill
gaps in the Department’s civilian workforce. It further directed the
Department to establish extramural research activities focused on
innovative acquisition processes to leverage expertise outside of the
Department, in order to provide academic analyses and policy al-
ternatives for consideration by the Department and Congress.
(2) Streamlining Acquisition Processes: To ensure the integrity of
the defense industrial supply base and improve risk mitigation, in-
cluding improving processes and procedures for assessing and miti-
gating risks related to foreign ownership, control or influence, Pub-
lic Law 116–92 directed the Department to streamline and digitize
its acquisition processes and reformed acquisition policies with an
increased emphasis on the software and personnel required to
make acquisition efficient and cost-effective. Exclusive attention to
cost, schedule, and performance of major defense acquisition pro-
grams and other development programs obscures myriad other
risks in programs, large and small, any one of which could be sin-
gle points of failure for successful acquisitions. The FY21 NDAA re-
quires Service Acquisition Executives, who play important roles as
portfolio managers and in executing programs, to report to Con-
gress about lessons learned in the implementation of the Adaptive
Acquisition Framework, including ‘‘middle tier’’ acquisition author-
ity. To achieve a careful balance between flexible acquisition proc-
esses and oversight, the FY21 NDAA also adds a congressional no-
tification requirement after a program using rapid prototyping and/
or rapid fielding under ‘‘middle tier’’ of acquisition authority is ter-
minated. Given the role that the Service Acquisition Executives
play in portfolio and program management, this legislation would
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
leverage their authority and accountability to improve overall ac-
quisition policy. Furthermore, the FY21 NDAA enhances authori-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
48
ties for acquisition of space systems for the United States Space
Force and requires DOD to report to the committee on the use of
such authorities to ensure transparency and accountability.
(3) Increasing Transparency and Integrity: Public Law 116–92
empowered contracting officers to obtain cost or pricing data need-
ed to stop future price gouging by defense contractors with sole-
source contracts. The FY21 NDAA would require disclosure of ben-
eficial ownership in the database used by federal agency contract
and grant officers for contractor responsibility determinations and
clarify whistleblower rights by requiring Department of Defense
contractors to inform their employees that internal confidentiality
agreements do not prohibit the employees from lawfully reporting
fraud waste or abuse. Public Law 116–92 also placed increased
focus on the integrity of the defense industrial base, by directing
attention to contractor behavior that constitutes violations of the
law, fraud, and associated remedies, including suspension and de-
barment. In the conference report accompanying the William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021 (H. Rept. 116–617), the conferees directed the Depart-
ment to evaluate whether current suspension and debarment proc-
esses are sufficient to protect it from contractors that have been
cited for willful or repeated fair labor standards violations under
the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.
(4) Improving Industrial Policy Leadership: The FY21 NDAA
would require one of the Assistant Secretaries to be the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy, whose principal du-
ties will involve the overall supervision of policy of the Department
for developing and maintaining the defense industrial base of the
United States and ensuring a secure supply of materials critical to
national security. It would further direct the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Industrial Base Policy and other officials to establish
initiatives to help the Department of Defense better leverage the
innovation and agility of small businesses.
(5) Ensuring the Security of the Defense Industrial Base: Public
Law 116–92 directed the Department to develop a consistent, com-
prehensive framework to enhance cybersecurity for the DIB in con-
sultation with key stakeholders in industry. Additionally, Public
Law 116–92 strengthened the requirements for the national secu-
rity strategy for the national technology industrial base as well as
the annual report to Congress to ensure actual mitigation strate-
gies, individual responsible for the strategy, and the timelines to
eliminate the gaps and vulnerabilities. The FY21 NDAA requires
the DOD to provide quarterly status briefings to the committee on
these efforts.
(6) Invigorating Small Businesses: The committee continues to
recognize small businesses as an engine of our economy and is con-
cerned about the number of small businesses in the DIB. The FY21
NDAA directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial
Base Policy to establish initiatives that expand and diversify the
number of small businesses in the national technology and indus-
trial base, and improve their resiliency and competitiveness, even
in the face of national emergencies. Given the importance of past
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
performance evaluations to small businesses competing in the DIB,
the FY21 NDAA requires contracting officers to consider a small
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
49
business concern’s past performance in a joint venture or as a first-
tier subcontractor when evaluating the small business concern’s
offer for a prime contract, if the small business so chooses.
(7) Expanding Acquisition Reform: The committee led efforts to
continue and expand Acquisition Reform to the capability require-
ments process and sustainment activities. The FY21 NDAA re-
quires the Department to conduct two assessments on the capa-
bility requirements process. Additionally, the FY21 NDAA directs
a panel to look at weapon system sustainment as well as enhance
the requirements of a weapon systems life cycle plan. The FY21
NDAA also includes the transfer and reorganization of the defense
acquisition statutes, which will set the conditions for future re-
forms.
(8) Future of Warfare: The FY21 NDAA expands the use of
modularity in the design of weapons systems, as well as business
systems and cybersecurity systems, to enable competition for up-
grades as well as sustainment throughout a product’s lifecycle, en-
hance interoperability, and to support combining and recombining
systems in novel ways to achieve joint all-domain warfare and the
emerging joint warfighting concept.
Financial Management
In the 116th Congress, the committee continued to oversee mili-
tary effectiveness and fiscal responsibility in a dynamic budgeting
environment. Under the Budget Control Act (BCA) of 2011 (Public
Law 112–25), as modified by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019
(Public Law 116–37), recent years have seen significant increases
in national defense discretionary spending, necessitating significant
oversight in order to ensure the Department of Defense is a respon-
sible steward of taxpayer dollars.
The Comptroller General of the United States has consistently
identified the Department of Defense’s financial management as a
high-risk area since 1995. The Department of Defense has made
some progress in modernizing its financial management capabili-
ties, but arcane and obsolete financial management processes and
systems continue to struggle to accurately track and account for
billions of dollars and funding and tangible assets, which under-
mines confidence in the Department’s financial management sys-
tems and requires significant congressional oversight.
The committee continued to review efforts to implement the Fi-
nancial Improvement and Audit Readiness (FIAR) plan, as man-
dated by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2010 (Public Law 111–84). The Inspector General of the Depart-
ment of Defense conducted the first agency-wide financial audit of
the Department in fiscal year 2018, and continues to conduct such
audits annually. On May 16, 2019, the committee held a hearing
examining the Department’s progress and the path forward for
audit readiness and remediation efforts. Committee staff also en-
gaged regularly with the Department in order to examine trends
and concerns within the broader audit effort, monitor interdepend-
encies between the FIAR plan and business systems modernization
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
efforts, and oversee corrective actions and process improvements.
Both the Department and Congress depend on the objective tools
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
50
provided by proper financial management processes and statements
in order to make informed decisions.
READINESS
Maintenance and Training
As the military services invest in modernization initiatives, con-
tinuing to make proper investments in the maintenance and train-
ing of legacy weapon systems through divestment is important for
military readiness and the safety of personnel. To that end, the
committee conducted oversight of the budget requests of the mili-
tary services in support of weapon system sustainment and train-
ing and, where appropriate, recommended resource adjustments in
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Pub-
lic Law 116–92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National De-
fense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA).
The committee took particular interest in the challenge of getting
Navy ships out of shipyard maintenance periods on schedule and
on budget. In response, the committee conducted oversight of Navy
initiatives to improve planning and execution of shipyard work and
programming of shipyard availabilities in the budget request. Sec-
tion 363 of Public Law 116–92 and section 343 of the FY21 NDAA
sought to improve transparency and oversight of Navy ship depot
maintenance budget requests and execution. Similarly, the com-
mittee noted concerns in both the committee reports accompanying
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (H.
Rept. 116–120) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National De-
fense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (H. Rept. 116–442) re-
garding depot carryover limits and the way the services calculate
allowable depot workload that is carried over from one year to the
next.
The committee continued to examine the operational tempo of
units to ensure that adequate periods for maintenance, training,
and reset are built into the deployment cycles. This becomes more
challenging as the services implement new concepts and introduce
new weapon systems and capabilities into the force. To that end,
the committee conducted oversight changes to the force generation
models, such as the Army’s Regionally Aligned Readiness and Mod-
ernization Model and the Navy’s Optimized Fleet Response Plan,
through reporting requirements included in the committee reports
accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116–120) and the William M. (Mac) Thorn-
berry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (H.
Rept. 116–442).
Finally, the committee examined ways that commercial best
practices, new technology, and data analytics can help the military
services more efficiently maintain weapon systems and effectively
train personnel. This includes the collection of real-time data and
analysis of historical maintenance records to develop a more effi-
cient, predictive, and effective maintenance strategy as well as the
use of augmented and virtual reality training and simulators to im-
prove training. The committee conducted oversight of these initia-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
tives through reporting requirements included in the committee re-
ports accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
51
Fiscal Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116–120) and the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (H. Rept. 116–442).
Logistics
Survivable logistics is a key combat support area and a critical
enabler underpinning U.S. military power. The committee con-
ducted oversight of the Department of Defense’s efforts to protect
and sustain its prepositioned stocks, communications networks,
and tanker, strategic airlift, and military sealift fleets. The com-
mittee also focused on oversight of the Defense Logistics Agency
(DLA), the Department of Defense entity responsible for managing
the global supply chain and providing goods and services in support
of the total force. DLA’s role in supporting the requirements of geo-
graphic and functional combatant commands was also of impor-
tance to the committee.
The Department of Defense often prioritizes funding of combat
capabilities (weapon systems, warships, fighters, bombers, land
combat vehicles) over logistics capabilities (sealift, fuel distribution,
contested logistics assets). To that end, the committee noted the
importance of investing in a more secure and resilient logistics and
transportation infrastructure and set out to assist the Department
of Defense in balancing its priorities and adequately funding the lo-
gistics enterprise. The committee examined the Department’s air-
lift, sealift, and tanker sustainment and recapitalization plan, and
in some cases prohibited divestiture of legacy assets until the De-
partment fields a sufficient quantity of operational next-generation
systems.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116–92) included a reporting requirement on strategic
policy for prepositioned materiel and equipment. In addition, the
William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA), required the Department of De-
fense to designate a single organization to be responsible for bulk
fuel management and delivery through the U.S. Indo-Pacific Com-
mand region and develop a bulk fuel management strategy. Fi-
nally, the FY21 NDAA mandated a recurring requirement for the
Department of Defense to conduct a comprehensive review of
sustainment and logistics requirements necessary to support the
force structure, force modernization, infrastructure, and other ele-
ments of the defense program and policies of the United States. Fi-
nally, in the committee report accompanying the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (H. Rept. 116–442), the committee required reports on De-
partment of Defense Fuel Contracting and Department of Defense
Warehouse Space Management.
Life-Cycle Sustainment
Design decisions made during weapon system development can
create sustainment problems that drive costly depot-level mainte-
nance once the system is fielded. The committee focused on reduc-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
ing the total ownership costs of weapon systems and equipment by
ensuring the Department of Defense is developing, procuring, and
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
52
modernizing weapon systems and equipment with consideration of
life-cycle support and sustainment requirements and cost. To that
end, section 802 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National De-
fense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) seeks
to improve sustainment planning in the acquisition milestone proc-
ess and help control cost growth for major weapon systems.
The committee continued to conduct oversight of weapon system
sustainment issues by monitoring materiel condition metrics such
as availability rates and mission capable rates. To improve congres-
sional oversight and military service accountability, section 351 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Pub-
lic Law 116–92) and section 347 of the FY21 NDAA implemented
and then refined a requirement for the Department to develop ma-
teriel readiness metrics and objectives for major weapon systems,
regularly review and update the metrics and objectives, and report
on them with the annual budget request. Finally, the committee
recognized the benefit of having continuous, independent review of
the weapon system sustainment enterprise to constantly seek op-
portunities for improvement. To that end, section 345 of the FY21
NDAA would establish an independent advisory panel to focus on
ways to improve the weapon system sustainment ecosystem.
Organic Industrial Base
Our Nation’s organic industrial base is vital to achieving and
maintaining warfighting readiness across all domains. The military
services’ arsenals, depots, air logistics complexes, and shipyards
provide long-term sustainment through programmed maintenance
and conduct repair and modernization upgrades. These facilities
and their skilled workforces provide a national-level insurance pol-
icy against unforeseen national strategic contingencies. The com-
mittee remained concerned about the current state and future
health of the organic industrial base as a result of an extended pe-
riod of fiscal uncertainty, increasing maintenance and sustainment
requirements, workforce attrition and recruiting challenges, and an
overemphasis on modernization initiatives at the expense of invest-
ments in maintaining legacy weapon systems.
The committee continued to conduct oversight to ensure the De-
partment of Defense’s organic industrial base is viably positioned
for long-term sustainability and has the workforce, equipment, and
facilities for efficient operations to meet the Nation’s current and
future requirements. For example, section 359 of the National De-
fense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92)
required the Secretary of Defense to develop a comprehensive strat-
egy for improving the depot infrastructure of the military depart-
ments with the objective of ensuring that all depots have the capac-
ity and capability to support the readiness and material avail-
ability goals of current and future weapon systems. The committee
also conducted oversight of how the military services ensure the
depot workforce possesses the capabilities and skills to support
emerging requirements as well as how the military services are re-
cruiting, training, and preparing to retain the future workforce. To
this end, the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Au-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
thorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) would provide
temporary authority to the Secretary of Defense to appoint retired
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
53
members of the Armed Forces to positions at the level of GS–13
and below at defense industrial base facilities.
The committee also continued its work to oversee carryover man-
agement. The committee noted concerns in both the committee re-
ports accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116–120) and the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (H. Rept. 116–442) regarding depot carryover limits and the
way the services calculate allowable depot workload that is carried
over from one year to the next.
The committee took particular interest in the challenge of getting
Navy ships out of shipyard maintenance periods on schedule and
on budget. In response, the committee conducted oversight of Navy
initiatives to improve planning and execution of shipyard work and
programming of shipyard availabilities in the budget request. Sec-
tion 363 of Public Law 116–92 and section 343 of the FY21 NDAA
sought to improve transparency and oversight of Navy ship depot
maintenance budget requests and execution.
Civilian Personnel
The Federal civilian workforce of the Department of Defense
plays a critical role in advancing national security. The Depart-
ment employs more Federal civilians than any other agency and
these personnel perform disparate and essential missions across
the globe. The committee focused on providing the Department
with the proper tools to invest in a strong civilian workforce that
contributes effectively to the success of the Department’s mission.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116–92) included several provisions to support the ci-
vilian workforce. In order to enable the entire Federal Government
to better compete with the private sector for talent, Public Law
116–92 provided 12 weeks of paid parental leave to all Federal ci-
vilian employees. In addition, Public Law 116–92 provided that ci-
vilians moving as part of their employment within the Federal Gov-
ernment are not taxed for their relocation expenses paid for by the
government. The bill provided extensions to the authority that per-
mits certain allowances, benefits, and gratuities for civilian per-
sonnel on official duty in combat zones and to the authority that
waives limitations on premium pay for civilians serving overseas.
Public Law 116–92 also expanded and extended to 2025 several
hiring authorities so that the Department of Defense can quickly
hire civilian personnel into key areas, such as the defense indus-
trial facilities (shipyards, depots, and arsenals) and major range
and test facilities. Finally, in the committee report accompanying
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (H.
Rept. 116–120), the committee noted concerns and established re-
porting requirements relating to involuntary civilian reductions in
force, total force management, borrowed military manpower, and
the use of term and temporary hiring authorities.
The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) included additional leg-
islative provisions to support the civilian workforce. The bill would
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
extend paid parental leave to approximately 100,000 Federal civil-
ians inadvertently excluded from the provision in Public Law 116–
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
54
92, including Article I judges and employees at the Department of
Veterans Affairs, Transportation Security Administration, Federal
Aviation Administration, White House, and the courts and public
defender’s office in Washington, DC. In recognition of Federal civil-
ians’ dedicated service to the country throughout the pandemic, the
FY21 NDAA also would permit the Office of Personnel Manage-
ment to authorize agencies to allow most Federal civilians to carry
over an additional 25 percent of annual leave into 2021. Further,
the FY21 NDAA would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from re-
ducing the civilian workforce unless the Department assesses the
impact of such a reduction on workload, military force structure,
lethality, readiness, and operational effectiveness. The FY21 NDAA
also included the Elijah Cummings Federal Employee Antidiscrimi-
nation Act, which would require each Federal agency to establish
a model Equal Employment Opportunity Program that is inde-
pendent of the agency’s human capital or general counsel offices
and would establish requirements related to complaints of discrimi-
nation and retaliation in the workplace. Finally, the FY21 NDAA
would provide extensions to the authorities that permit certain al-
lowances, benefits, and gratuities for civilian personnel on official
duty in combat zones; waive limitations on premium pay for civil-
ians serving overseas; and allow the Navy to pay overtime to cer-
tain civilian shipyard employees working in Japan.
In the conference report accompanying the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (H. Rept. 116–617), the conferees also noted that the Office
of Personnel Management (OPM) has not yet implemented rec-
ommendations by the Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee
to align Federal wage system wage areas with General Schedule lo-
cality pay areas across the country and encouraged OPM to ad-
dress this longstanding issue as soon as possible.
Personnel Background Investigations
The committee is concerned about the timeliness, quality, and
cost of processing Federal security clearance applications and the
impact that has on our national security apparatus’ ability to effec-
tively recruit and retain high-quality professionals. In 2018, the
Government Accountability Office added the government-wide per-
sonnel security clearance process to its High-Risk List, which iden-
tifies Federal areas in need of urgent reforms to address significant
challenges. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2018 (Public Law 115–91) directed that the Department of Defense
resume responsibility for background investigations for Department
of Defense personnel and defense contractors and directed the Sec-
retary of Defense to begin a phased transition of all investigations
previously conducted by the National Background Investigations
Bureau (NBIB) to the Department of Defense. In October 2019, the
NBIB was incorporated into the Defense Counterintelligence and
Security Agency (DCSA), which also absorbed several other compo-
nents including the Defense Security Service and the Consolidated
Adjudications Facility.
Given the importance of conducting security, suitability, and
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
credentialing background investigations for Department of Defense
personnel, and the fact that the Department now has the responsi-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
55
bility to conduct the majority of such investigations solicited by the
U.S. Government, the committee continued its oversight to ensure
a smooth transition and that clearances are investigated and adju-
dicated in a timely fashion. The committee also continued its over-
sight of DCSA’s transition to government-wide continuous vetting.
To this end, the committee received quarterly briefings from the
Department on security, suitability, and credentialing reform.
In addition, the committee noted concerns in the committee re-
port accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fis-
cal Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116–120) regarding the persistent backlog
of security clearance applications and required the Secretary of De-
fense to submit a report to the congressional defense committees on
the scope of the investigative and adjudicative backlog, plans to re-
duce the backlog, DCSA staffing, and reforms to ensure a high-
quality security clearance process. Finally, the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92) re-
quired the DCSA Director to provide a report on improving the
quality of information in background investigation request pack-
ages.
Energy and Environment
The military services continue to invest in installation and oper-
ational energy improvements. Energy resilient installations mini-
mize the impacts of natural and manmade energy interruptions,
ensuring continuity of operations. Increased efficiency enhances ef-
fectiveness and produces cost savings that can be applied to other
installation readiness needs. Operational energy capability im-
provements enhance readiness by extending operational reach and
on-station time and limiting reliance on fossil fuel convoys, improv-
ing our national security posture. Therefore, the committee contin-
ued to conduct oversight of the Department of Defense and military
services’ efforts to address resiliency gaps and improve energy effi-
ciency on military installations and for military operations. To that
end, where appropriate, the committee recommended resource ad-
justments and policy changes in the National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92) and the William
M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA).
The committee continued to examine the Department’s policies
and investments in both installation and operational energy, con-
ducting oversight of these matters through analysis of budget re-
quests and execution of existing policy. Sections 317 and 319 of
Public Law 116–92 sought to incentivize the Department of De-
fense to make more positive energy resilience investments. Sections
315, 316, 317, 2804, 2823, and 2825 of the FY21 NDAA addressed
energy resilience and energy security on military installations. Sec-
tions 322, 323, and 324 of the FY21 NDAA sought to improve the
Department’s capability to make operational energy improvements.
Similarly, the committee noted concerns in both the committee re-
ports accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116–120) and the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
2021 (H. Rept. 116–442) about the Department’s execution of its
operational energy and installation energy resilience programs.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
56
In addition, the committee conducted oversight of the Depart-
ment and military services’ environmental management. The com-
mittee expressed concern about the Department’s efforts to address
the impacts of climate change on training and installation resil-
ience. Sections 326, 327, 328, 2801, 2804, 2805, and 2806 of Public
Law 116–92 sought to focus the Department’s efforts toward im-
proving installation resilience in the face of climate change. Sec-
tions 327, 328, and 2827 of the FY21 NDAA would require the De-
partment to increase its transparency and update its analysis re-
garding greenhouse gas emissions and planning for climate change.
Similarly, the committee noted concerns in both the committee re-
ports accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116–120) and the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (H. Rept. 116–442) about the Department’s planning for in-
stallation resilience in the face of increasing instances of extreme
weather, drought, wildfire, and sea-level rise.
The committee continued to conduct oversight of the Depart-
ment’s efforts with respect to contamination caused by its use of
per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) to include identification
and remediation of contaminated sites, and research and develop-
ment of alternatives. Sections 322, 323, 324, 329, and 330 of Public
Law 116–92 sought to limit further contamination by limiting use
of PFAS-containing fire-fighting agents, creating guidance for han-
dling and disposal of PFAS-contaminated materials, and banning
the use of PFAS-containing packaging for Meals Ready-to-Eat.
Likewise, Sections 330, 331, 332, 333, 334, and 335 of the FY21
NDAA sought to build on policies that encouraged transparency
with communities and focused effort on research and development.
Similarly, the committee noted concerns in both the committee re-
ports accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116–120) and the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (H. Rept. 116–442) about the Department’s transparency in
communicating with impacted communities and sense of urgency in
remediating PFAS contamination in defense communities.
Military Construction, Facilities Sustainment, and Real Property
Management
The committee continued its oversight of the Department of De-
fense’s military construction program to manage the overall capac-
ity of the Department’s infrastructure and to ensure resilient long-
term military construction investments. The committee also contin-
ued its oversight of the Department’s investments in facility
sustainment, restoration, and modernization, particularly as an in-
strument of disaster recovery and resiliency enhancement. To that
end, the committee conducted oversight of budget requests of the
Department of Defense and military services in support of the mili-
tary construction program and where appropriate recommended re-
source adjustments and policy changes in the National Defense Au-
thorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92) and the
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA).
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
57
The real property management process requires extensive over-
sight to maintain almost $749.0 billion in infrastructure. The com-
mittee conducted oversight of the Department’s efforts to improve
its internal management of its real property to include better re-
quirements development to reduce project planning inefficiencies
that have resulted in poorly coordinated investment decisions and
suboptimal facility construction.
The committee significantly increased its oversight of the Mili-
tary Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI) program particularly
with respect to maintenance and sustainment of housing develop-
ments. The committee noted a lack of oversight by the Department
and military services of military family housing developments man-
aged by private partners. The committee examined ways to en-
hance this oversight and make policy changes that would ensure
military families lived only in safe, high-quality MHPI homes. Title
30 of Public Law 116–92 sought to make sweeping changes to the
management, oversight, sustainment of MHPI housing units, as
well as improve the treatment of the tenants of these units. Sec-
tions 2811 through 2818 of the FY21 NDAA sought to continue to
increase accountability and transparency about the conditions and
financial solvency of MHPI projects. Similarly, the committee noted
concerns in both the committee reports accompanying the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116–120)
and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (H. Rept. 116–442).
The committee also increased its oversight of installation resil-
ience matters to include energy resiliency and resilience to climate
change. As noted in the Energy and Environment section of this re-
port, both Public Law 116–92 and and the FY21 NDAA contained
sections that sought to encourage enhancements in installation re-
siliency. Similarly, the committee noted concerns about gaps in the
Department’s policies related to resiliency in both the committee
reports accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116–120) and the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (H. Rept. 116–442).
Finally, the FY21 NDAA included a provision that would estab-
lish an independent commission to make recommendations to the
Secretary of Defense for the renaming of assets or removal of sym-
bols, displays, monuments, and paraphernalia that commemorate
the Confederate States of America or any person who served volun-
tarily with the Confederate States of America from all assets of the
Department of Defense.
MILITARY PERSONNEL AND HEALTH CARE ISSUES
Military Manpower and Force Structure
During the 116th Congress, the committee continued to assess
the military’s manpower requirements to meet its current and fu-
ture global military commitments. Specifically, the committee con-
tinued to provide aggressive oversight of military manpower levels,
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
skill sets, and force structure to ensure they support the National
Defense Strategy. In the 116th Congress, the committee examined
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
58
trends in overall total force structure requirements, end strength,
recruiting, retention, morale, and benefits and compensation.
The committee focused on integration of women into combat
arms positions in the Army and Marine Corps and on ensuring the
military is inclusive and represents the demographics of the U.S.
population. As part of this oversight the committee sponsored a
congressional delegation (CODEL) to Fort Bragg and Camp
Lejeune, North Carolina, and another CODEL to Fort Lewis and
Travis Air Force Base to meet with women who had transitioned
to a combat arms position in units. The National Defense Author-
ization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92) required the
Marine Corps to gender integrate basic training at Parris Island
within 5 years and at San Diego within 8 years. The committee
also held a hearing on December 10, 2019, on diversity in recruit-
ing and retention and increasing diversity in the military.
In the second session of the 116th Congress, the committee con-
tinued its oversight of increasing diversity in the military by in-
cluding legislation in the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) that
would require a Chief Diversity Officer of the Department of De-
fense and would require the Secretary of Defense to create a strat-
egy for increasing diversity in the military as part of the National
Defense Strategy, to include measurable metrics with a progress
report as part of each new National Defense Strategy.
Military Benefits and Compensation
During the 116th Congress, the committee gave close scrutiny to
draft proposals from the Department of Defense calling for changes
to military compensation and other benefit programs. The oversight
of the Subcommittee on Military Personnel ensured such proposals
were thoroughly assessed with respect to their positive or negative
impacts to the All-Volunteer Force. Specifically, the draft Depart-
ment of Defense proposals to reform the Reserve Component call-
up duty status authorities which would overhaul the way a Reserve
Component service member is activated were considered. The sub-
committee’s oversight in this area was concentrated on the proper
alignment of the new authorities to ensure that the pay and bene-
fits for Reserve Component members would not be adversely af-
fected. To that end, on March 27, 2020, the subcommittee met to
receive testimony on Reserve Component duty status reform. Al-
though the Department of Defense unveiled to the committee a
very detailed and thorough plan for changes to the duty status au-
thorities, the proposal did not reach the committee in time for in-
clusion in the fiscal year 2020 or 2021 National Defense Authoriza-
tion Acts.
The subcommittee’s oversight of pay and allowance issues led the
committee, as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92), to recommend no change to
current law, thereby enabling the by-law 3.1 percent raise in basic
pay during calendar year 2020 based on section 1009 of title 37,
United States Code. It is the intent of the underlying law to ensure
military pay raises match the rate of compensation increases in the
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
private sector as measured by the Employment Cost Index. As part
of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authoriza-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
59
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA), the committee again
recommended no change to the current law which would result in
a basic pay increase of 3.0 percent for 2021. Additionally, the FY21
NDAA included legislation that would increase certain hazardous
duty incentive pay for members of the uniformed services.
Public Law 116–92 and the FY21 NDAA also extended the au-
thorities to pay bonuses and special pays during fiscal year 2020
and fiscal year 2021, and the subcommittee monitored the value of
those bonuses and special pays to ensure they were sufficient to
achieve the recruiting and retention objectives for which they were
developed. The FY21 NDAA includes legislation that would in-
crease the bonus authority for officer healthcare professionals to
help to address the Department of Defense’s overall shortage in
this critical area.
Finally, the committee maintained focus on the Survivor Benefit
Plan (SBP) financial offset from the Dependency and Indemnity
Compensation (DIC). Legislation in the National Defense Author-
ization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110–181) established
a Special Survivor Indemnity Allowance for surviving spouses who
are the beneficiary of the SBP annuity and have their annuity par-
tially or fully offset by the DIC which was due to expire. The com-
mittee’s continued oversight in this area and the focus on a whole-
of-Congress solution for the complete repeal of the SBP annuity off-
set by DIC led to legislation being included in Public Law 116–92
that eliminated the offset.
Military Health System
During the 116th Congress, the committee continued its over-
sight of military health policies of the Department of Defense. The
Department is charged with both supporting the readiness require-
ments of the warfighter and delivering a robust military health
benefit, all while creating efficiencies and implementing cost sav-
ings initiatives that may alter the composition of the existing Mili-
tary Health System (MHS). Through briefings and hearings, the
committee examined military medical manning requirements,
TRICARE benefit delivery, wounded warrior programs, resiliency,
opioid policy, and ongoing reform efforts that are transitioning mili-
tary treatment facilities and other organizational structures from
the military service departments to the Defense Health Agency.
The committee also continued to monitor the implementation of the
Genesis Electronic Health Record, as well as other health-related
collaborations between the Department of Defense and Department
of Veterans Affairs such as suicide prevention. The committee held
two joint hearings with the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs
to review both electronic health records and veteran suicide.
The committee held a hearing on the Feres Doctrine to hear tes-
timony on whether the policy needed reform to improve the quality
of healthcare delivered in military treatment facilities as well as
provide more compensation to beneficiaries impacted by medical
malpractice. Although the committee did not repeal or change the
Feres Doctrine, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92) authorized the Secretary of Defense
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
to allow, settle, and pay an administrative claim against the
United States for personal injury or death of a member of the uni-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
60
formed services that was the result of medical malpractice caused
by a Department of Defense healthcare provider.
During the second session of the 116th Congress the committee
continued to monitor the Department’s reform of the MHS as well
as provided considerable oversight of the Department’s response to
COVID. The committee held two member-level briefings with out-
side experts on the Department’s response to the pandemic and the
staff held numerous briefings with the Department on topics from
force protection to testing and vaccine development and distribu-
tion. The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Author-
ization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) includes provisions
that would require the Department to review its posture, plans,
and training for future pandemics; create a registry of TRICARE
beneficiaries diagnosed with COVID–19; and partner with civilian
healthcare and Federal agencies to enhance interoperability and
create medical surge capability and capacity of the national med-
ical system.
Military Personnel Policy
During the 116th Congress, the personnel policies of the Depart-
ment of Defense remained under considerable scrutiny as the serv-
ices compete to recruit, manage, and retain the best and brightest
men and women. The Subcommittee on Military Personnel contin-
ued to give close examination to proposals from the Department of
Defense and other organizations calling for any major changes to
personnel policies including recruiting, promotions, career paths or
changes to military retention, talent management, and other policy
programs in order to assess the impact of any proposed changes on
the viability of the All-Volunteer Force.
As a part of this personnel policy oversight, the subcommittee fo-
cused on officer personnel management. To that end, the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–
92) authorized personnel policies to increase the Department’s
flexibility to manage personnel talent. The provisions included the
authority of promotion boards to recommend that officers of par-
ticular merit be placed higher on the promotion list. The William
M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) includes a provision that would expand
the availability of enhanced constructive service credit in a par-
ticular career field upon original appointment as a commissioned
officer.
In a continuation of the subcommittee’s oversight responsibilities,
on March 12, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
outside perspectives on military personnel policy, and on May 16,
2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony from the Depart-
ment of Defense on military personnel management.
In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID–19) pan-
demic, the subcommittee included in the FY21 NDAA several au-
thorizations that concerned the management of the Reserve Com-
ponents that have been called to duty in response to the pandemic.
The authorities include constructive credit for certain members of
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
the Reserve Components who could not complete minimum annual
training requirements as a result of the COVID–19 pandemic, and
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
61
quarantine housing for members of the National Guard who per-
form certain duty in response to the COVID–19 emergency.
Since the establishment of the U.S. Space Force as a separate
service in Public Law 116–92 the committee continued to work
with the Department to oversee, establish, and legislate the appro-
priate personnel policies for the new service. To that end, the sub-
committee participated in quarterly briefings by the Space Force
leadership on the way forward for manning the Space Force, gen-
eral personnel policies, and specific general officer manning num-
bers and associated personnel policy.
Uniform Code of Military Justice, Sexual Assault and Domestic
Violence
The committee continued its record of providing effective over-
sight of military justice, which included implementation of the com-
prehensive overhaul of the Uniform Code of Military Justice man-
dated by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2017 (Public Law 114–328). The committee also continued its ro-
bust oversight of the Department of Defense’s sexual assault pre-
vention and response programs with a focus on implementation of
best practices for prevention programs, including programs de-
signed to address and prevent domestic violence in the military.
In exercising its oversight of sexual assault prevention and re-
sponse, the committee executed several congressional delegations
(CODELs) and staff delegations focused on programs at the instal-
lation level. The oversight trips, coupled with two hearings on sex-
ual assault and one hearing on domestic violence, helped the com-
mittee shape and pass legislation to better protect and provide care
for victims of sexual assault and domestic violence. The National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–
92) increased resources available to sexual assault survivors, in-
cluding an increase in the number of investigative personnel and
Victim Witness Assistance Program liaisons, with the goal of en-
suring that investigations of sex-related offenses be completed not
later than 6 months after the date of initiation. It also required ad-
ditional training for commanders regarding disposition of sexual
assault and collateral offenses. Public Law 116–92 also required
the Department of Defense to establish a program to provide legal
counsel to domestic violence victims to assist them before and dur-
ing the court-martial process. Counsel providing services under this
program were also required to receive specialized training on issues
commonly associated with domestic violence.
In the second session of the 116th Congress, the Subcommittee
on Military Personnel held a hearing on racial disparities in the
military justice system to discuss causes and potential remedies.
The committee focused significantly on Fort Hood, Texas, and the
deaths of several soldiers, to include Specialist (SPC) Vanessa
Guillen. The committee conducted one briefing with the Army’s
Criminal Investigation Command to hear details of the disappear-
ance and investigation of the death of SPC Guillen and one hybrid
hearing covering the U.S. Army Forces Command Inspector Gen-
eral’s review of the sexual harassment and assault prevention pro-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
grams at Fort Hood, which included testimony from two advocates
for victims of military sexual trauma. The committee also spon-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
62
sored a CODEL to Fort Hood to receive information firsthand from
investigators, commanders, and soldiers. Finally, the subcommittee
held a hearing with the Fort Hood Independent Review Committee
to discuss the 9 findings and 70 recommendations the committee
made to the Secretary of the Army regarding the problems ema-
nating from Fort Hood.
The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2021 includes provisions that would create
an independent civilian task force to study and make recommenda-
tions to prevent and prosecute domestic violence within the mili-
tary services, require establishment of a capability for confidential
reporting of sexual harassment, and require implementation of a
Safe to Report policy across the services that establishes standards
for the handling of collateral misconduct committed by victims of
sexual assault.
Military Family Readiness
During the 116th Congress, the Subcommittee on Military Per-
sonnel continued to focus on the support provided to families of
members of the Armed Forces, particularly when their servicemem-
ber spouse is deployed. The subcommittee continued to assess the
methods used by the military services to identify the needs of mili-
tary families and to identify the programs and policies that can be
implemented or modified to improve their quality of life. As end
strengths of the Armed Forces continued to increase, the committee
closely examined the Department of Defense and military services’
family support programs to ensure the programs are adequately
resourced to support an increase in family members.
In addition, the subcommittee continued close oversight on the
quality and availability of services at Department of Defense child
development centers. To that end, the continued rigorous oversight
of the subcommittee on family readiness issues resulted in the in-
clusion of several provisions in the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92) relating to a critical
component of family readiness, childcare. The provisions included
authorizing service members to take leave for a birth or adoption
in more than one increment, and deferring deployment for one year
for service members who give birth. Additionally, further improve-
ments to childcare availability were addressed, including the direct
hire of childcare employees.
Spouse employment and education issues were also of continued
importance in the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA). Provisions
were included that would address the expansion of the My Career
Advancement Account program for military spouses to nonportable
career fields and occupations and expand financial assistance
under My Career Advancement Account program to assist spouses
with continuing education. The subcommittee continued its over-
sight efforts with regard to childcare and the FY21 NDAA included
childcare provisions that would require childcare availability for
shift workers, establish a program for financial assistance for serv-
ice members using in-home child care, and an assessment of finan-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
cial assistance available to service members using non-Department
of Defense child care facilities. A focus on enhancing children’s edu-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
63
cation resulted in provisions included in the FY21 NDAA that
would establish a pilot program to expand eligibility for enrollment
at domestic dependent elementary and secondary school, and a
pilot program on expanded eligibility for Department of Defense
Education Activity Virtual High School program to further assist
military families. Finally, the FY21 NDAA would require the De-
partment of Defense to standardize and improve the Exceptional
Family Member Program to assist families with special needs.
Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Programs and Military Resale
Programs
The committee believes the cost-efficient sustainment of Morale,
Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) and military resale programs (com-
missaries and exchanges) is required to protect quality of life in
military communities. The Subcommittee on Military Personnel
provided oversight efforts directed toward that end in conjunction
with continuing major resale reforms, begun in the 114th Congress,
to ensure the continued viability of these programs.
Additionally, the subcommittee believes that MWR and military
resale programs must remain competitive with private sector enti-
ties to ensure that service members and their families benefit fully
from these programs. During the 116th Congress, the sub-
committee monitored current practices and policies to ensure that
MWR and military resale programs employed the full range of
strategies available to private sector competitors to inform author-
ized patrons about the benefits associated with these programs and
encourage their participation.
The subcommittee continued to monitor and oversee the changes
required by the commissary reform plan with an emphasis on
maintaining this valuable benefit without interruption. To that
end, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116–92) contained a provision on defense resale mat-
ters that required the Department of Defense to develop a business
strategy that preserves service member savings. During the 116th
Congress, the Subcommittee on Military Personnel continued its
oversight of the defense retail system by receiving a quarterly
briefing from the Department of Defense on the savings targets
and the ongoing resale reform plan. This oversight continued
throughout the 116th Congress and the William M. (Mac) Thorn-
berry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 con-
tains a provision that would expand the previous provisions on this
issue to restart the reform process by mandating an updated busi-
ness case analysis for the reform and for consolidation of the de-
fense resale system.
Prisoner of War and Missing in Action
During the 116th Congress, the committee continued oversight of
the Department of Defense’s Prisoner of War/Missing in Action ac-
tivities. Specifically, the committee focused on the operations of the
Defense Personnel Accounting Agency (DPAA) to ensure they are
meeting the requirement that the accounting effort achieve at least
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
200 identifications annually. Committee staff met multiple times
with the leadership of DPAA to monitor progress in achieving the
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
64
required minimum 200 identifications annually. DPAA continues to
work to regain access to recover missing service members from
North Korea as a humanitarian mission. Unfortunately, due to
COVID, DPAA had to cancel the majority of its overseas oper-
ations, but remains postured to execute when the conditions allow.
DPAA laboratories were able to devise ways to continue forensic
identification work in Hawaii and at Offutt Air Force Base, Ne-
braska, yielding 120 identifications for fiscal year 2020.
Arlington National Cemetery
The committee continued its oversight from the 115th Congress
of Arlington National Cemetery (ANC) into the 116th Congress.
The John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232) directed the Secretary of the Army
to establish revised eligibility criteria for interment at Arlington
National Cemetery to ensure that the cemetery remains an active
burial ground well into the future. The Secretary of the Army an-
nounced the draft proposed criteria September 25, 2019. The Army
has conducted over three and half years of thoughtful deliberation
and public outreach—including with veteran and military service
organizations—and active engagement with ANC senior leaders
and the Advisory Committee on ANC. On September 15, 2020, the
Army announced a 60-day public comment period and is in the
rulemaking process for revised eligibility for burial and inurnment
into Arlington National Cemetery.
MODERNIZATION AND INVESTMENT ISSUES
Overview
During the 116th Congress, the committee conducted oversight of
military equipment modernization strategies and programs. The
committee assessed the effectiveness of those strategies and their
ability to mitigate threats in the near-term and long-term from
near-peer and peer competitors. The committee’s efforts focused on
full-spectrum, combat-effective lethality from near-term moderniza-
tion efforts that utilize acquisition reform initiatives to speed devel-
opment and fielding of solutions to the warfighter. The committee
devoted attention to the military services’ implementation and uti-
lization of new, innovative, and agile acquisition reform authorities
to recapitalize, upgrade, or enhance the performance of current and
future combat systems. The committee also conducted oversight on
the military services’ ability to aggressively control development
and procurement costs, implement reasonable, executable and ac-
countable sustainment strategies that preserve system afford-
ability, as well as manage strategic risk in critical areas of the U.S.
defense industrial base.
The committee conducted oversight and produced legislation that
subsequently provides resources to mitigate cost growth and sched-
ule delays of modernization programs. The committee assessed the
need for legislative action on a range of concerns including late de-
termination of programmatic requirements; unjustified require-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
ments growth and failure to properly mitigate requirements
changes; insufficient analyses of alternatives; concurrency in test
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
65
and evaluation master plans; military services proceeding pre-
maturely with development of immature technology; poor cost esti-
mating; inadequate funding profiles; over-estimation of potential
production rates; program instability; and, improper use of new
and agile acquisition reform authorities.
Armored Vehicle Modernization
The committee focused on oversight of the Army and Marine
Corps’ evolving plans to improve the capability and extend the op-
erating lives of its current heavy- and medium-weight armored
combat vehicles. The committee evaluated plans for and conducted
oversight of research, development, production, and timely fielding
of its current fleets and next generation of these systems. The com-
mittee focused oversight efforts on management of these programs:
the Next Generation Combat Vehicle including the Optionally
Manned Fighting Vehicle, M1 Abrams tank, the M2 Bradley Fight-
ing Vehicles, the family of Stryker Combat Vehicles, the family of
Amphibious Combat Vehicles, the Light Armored Vehicle, the
M109A7 Paladin Integrated Management, the Armored Multipur-
pose Vehicle, the Army’s mobile protected firepower, and Active
Protection Systems for combat vehicles.
Tactical Wheeled Vehicles
The committee conducted oversight of the Army and Marine
Corps’ current and future tactical wheeled vehicle (TWV) fleets, in-
cluding their families of light, medium, and heavy TWVs and the
family of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles. The com-
mittee specifically focused those efforts on management of these
programs: Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles, Heavy Expanded
Mobility Tactical Truck, Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, Ground Mo-
bility Vehicle, Infantry Squad Vehicle, and High Mobility Multipur-
pose Wheeled Vehicle.
Rotorcraft Programs
The committee focused oversight efforts on rotorcraft moderniza-
tion, force structure, and readiness. The committee specifically ex-
amined how the military services are balancing plans to accelerate
development of next generation rotorcraft platforms with require-
ments to upgrade current rotorcraft platforms. Program areas of
oversight interest for the committee included the following pro-
grams: UH–60 Black Hawk utility rotorcraft, AH–64 Apache At-
tack rotorcraft, CH–47 Chinook heavy lift rotorcraft, UH–1 Huey
utility helicopters, AH–1 attack helicopter, CH–53K heavy lift
rotorcraft program, UH–1N utility helicopter replacement program,
Combat Rescue Helicopter, TH–73 advanced helicopter training
system, and the Future Vertical Lift (FVL) development program.
The committee also conducted oversight on advanced aircraft sur-
vivability equipment upgrades to provide warning and protection
against evolving threats, and monitored the Improved Turbine En-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
gine program, designed to improve lift capability on the AH–64,
UH–60, and FVL platforms.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
66
Communications and Network Programs
The committee conducted oversight on the research, develop-
ment, and procurement of tactical battlefield communications net-
works. Specifically, the committee examined the Army’s plans for
future battlefield network research and development programs, the
Army’s Tactical Network Modernization roadmap, and efforts on
the incremental development and fielding of the Integrated Tactical
Network and other tactical radio programs. The committee began
and will continue to conduct oversight on the Army’s ‘‘Project Con-
vergence’’ and development of systems that will contribute to Joint
All-Domain Command and Control.
Individual Soldier and Marine Equipment
The committee continued to monitor and oversee the research,
development, and procurement of soldier and marine individual
equipment, as well as other complementary personal protective
equipment programs. Focus areas included: advances in weight re-
duction (‘‘lightening the load’’) in individual equipment; develop-
ment of female-specific individual protective equipment; develop-
ment and procurement of the Enhanced Night Vision Goggle-Bin-
ocular; small arms and small caliber ammunition modernization
with particular emphasis on the Army’s next generation squad
weapon system; procurement and fielding of enhanced performance
small caliber rounds; improved combat helmets to help mitigate
traumatic brain injury; and the development and fielding of the In-
tegrated Visual Augmentation System.
Fixed-Wing Tactical and Training Aircraft
During the 116th Congress, the committee continued oversight
efforts on the size, composition, capability, and capacity of the De-
partment of Defense’s tactical and training aircraft force structure.
The committee engaged the Department through hearings and clas-
sified events to understand its aircraft force-mix strategy and com-
position regarding procurement of advanced-4th, 5th, and 6th gen-
eration tactical aircraft. Specifically, the committee scrutinized
plans to recapitalize existing tactical aircraft to ensure that mis-
sion areas related to air superiority, interdiction, and kinetic sup-
port to land and maritime forces maintain combat effectiveness re-
quirements. The committee engaged the Air Force, Navy, and Ma-
rine Corps to understand development, production, and recapital-
ization strategies to mitigate forecasted tactical aircraft inventory
shortfalls that impact the Department’s ability to implement the
National Defense Strategy. The committee continued oversight of
the Department’s efforts to improve capabilities and reliability
among the legacy fleet of aircraft and closely monitored the impacts
on aviation readiness related to procurement of initial spares, re-
paired parts, and consumable supplies.
The committee continued oversight of the F–35 program, particu-
larly with regard to affordability issues and concerns related to
program life-cycle cost, production and fielding schedules, aircraft
and support system performance, and sustainment strategy plan-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
ning and execution. The committee focused oversight efforts on the
F–35’s performance during the Initial Operational Test and Eval-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
67
uation phase, Block 4 software development, and the Continuous
Capability Development and Delivery follow-on modernization pro-
gram. The committee’s focus areas on the F–35 program included
production efficiency, software development and testing related to
the operational flight program and mission data files, addressing
F135 engine supply chain and risks, the Autonomic Logistics Infor-
mation System (ALIS) fielding and integration into operational F–
35 units, the beginning stages of the follow-on system named the
Operational Data Integration Network to replace the dysfunctional
ALIS, depot stand-up and facilitization, and supply chain manage-
ment required to support concurrent production and operational
maintenance and sustainment requirements.
In addition, the committee examined acquisition strategies re-
lated to the experimentation effort of the Air Force’s Light Attack
and Armed Reconnaissance platform, the Air Force’s F–15EX new
start program, and the Air Force’s and Navy’s initial plans and
concepts for development of Next Generation Air Dominance capa-
bilities. The committee continued engagement with the Air Force
and Navy regarding efforts to mitigate physiological episodes that
were prevalent and experienced by pilots operating tactical and
training aircraft equipped with the On-Board Oxygen Generating
System.
Tactical Missiles and Munitions
During the 116th Congress, the committee engaged the Depart-
ment of Defense on oversight of the testing and war-reserve mate-
rial requirements and subsequent production strategies to support
and maintain sufficient inventories of conventional tactical aircraft
missiles and munitions at an acceptable risk level. The committee
focused its attention on the Department’s identification, assess-
ment, and strategies for management of risk in the associated de-
fense industrial base and issues related to diminishing manufac-
turing sources, obsolescence issues, sole-source supply of compo-
nents and major sub-systems, and production capabilities needed to
support both annual production and surge requirements when nec-
essary. The committee examined the stability and predictability of
the Department’s near and long-term budget planning and execu-
tion to control cost and reduce uncertainty in the defense industrial
base.
Specifically, the committee focused on a wide-array of missile,
munitions, and ammunition programs of the Department of De-
fense, including but not limited to: high-energy lasers, Maneuver
Short Range Air Defense, Indirect Fire Protection Capability Inter-
ceptors, Iron Dome Interceptors, Precision Strike Missile, Advanced
Precision Kill Weapon System, Joint Air-to-Ground missile, the
Army Tactical Missile System, Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air
missile, Small Diameter Bomb I & II, Joint Direct Attack Munition,
Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile-Extended Range, Joint Ad-
vanced Tactical Missile, and precision-guided and preferred muni-
tions supporting the deterrence and warfighting requirements of
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
the geographical combatant commanders.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
68
Bomber Force Structure
During the 116th Congress, the committee continued oversight
efforts on the size, composition, capability, and capacity of the De-
partment of Defense’s bomber aircraft force structure. The com-
mittee is monitoring the development of the long-range strike
bomber aircraft B–21A Raider as the program moves through ac-
quisition. Section 132 and section 133 of the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 provide guidance to the Air Force on reviewing the bomber
fleet mix and end strength. The committee also understands that
long-range strike with standoff weapons will principally be con-
ducted by the B–1 Lancer and B–52 Stratofortress bombers over
the next decade. The committee is reviewing the development of a
legacy bomber modernization program that is commensurate with
the intended service life and fielding of advanced weapons.
The committee conducted oversight of the budget request in sup-
port of the B–52 Stratofortress Commercial Engine Replacement
Program and, where appropriate, recommended resource adjust-
ments in section 4201 of the FY21 NDAA.
Aerial Refueling Aircraft
During the 116th Congress, the committee reviewed the Air
Force aerial refueling aircraft modernization and recapitalization
programs, along with the Navy’s nascent refueling capability asso-
ciated with the MQ–25 Stingray program.
The Air Force currently requires 479 air refueling tankers to
meet the National Defense Strategy but only possesses 395 KC–
135R/T Stratotankers and 56 KC–10A Extender tankers for a total
of 451 legacy tankers. The committee is watching the procurement
of KC–46A Pegasus aircraft in light of the continuing deficiencies
in the remote vision system and is cautiously optimistic the aircraft
is on the path to be an operational air refueling aircraft in all situ-
ations. The addition of KC–46A aircraft will eventually grow the
tanker force to 479 aircraft. Subsequently, the Air Force plans to
replace its older tankers one-for-one with the planned 179 KC–46A
aircraft. Section 135 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 provides guidance
to the structure of the air refueling fleet until the KC–46A is oper-
ational. The remaining 300 KC–135 aircraft will need to be mod-
ernized. The committee has taken several briefs with the way
ahead for the KC–135s to conduct operations in contested airspace.
The committee visited and received several briefings and is con-
tinuing to review the MQ–25 program as the Navy seeks to develop
an unmanned aerial vehicle that adds an additional air refueling
capabilities. The committee received additional briefings on capa-
bility, modernization, and procurement of the KC–130J.
Airlift Programs
During the 116th Congress, the committee continued oversight
efforts on the size, composition, capability, and capacity of the De-
partment of Defense’s strategic and tactical aircraft force structure.
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
The committee engaged the Department through hearings and
briefings to understand tactical airlift modernization and recapital-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
69
ization strategy. The committee engaged the Air Force to under-
stand the modernization of the C–130H Hercules aircraft propellers
and engines. The committee continued to assess the risk in the Air
Force’s current plan to maintain an intratheater airlift aircraft in-
ventory to support the National Defense Strategy supported by sec-
tion 134 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Au-
thorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA).
The committee continued to provide oversight of the C–5M Super
Galaxy and C–17A Globemaster III modernization programs per
section 4101 of the FY21 NDAA.
Surface Warfare Programs
The Department of the Navy must expand the core capabilities
of U.S. seapower to achieve a blend of peacetime engagement and
major combat operations capabilities as part of the Navy’s 355-ship
requirement. During the 116th Congress, the committee provided
oversight of the composition, capacity, and capabilities of the sur-
face fleet. The committee also assessed the large and small surface
combatant requirements to ensure oversight of the force structure
and the associated weapons and sensors employed on the surface
force with a specific emphasis on Frigate capabilities. The com-
mittee continued to conduct oversight of the Littoral Combat Ship
and the sensors that will be fielded as part of the mission modules.
Further oversight of the amphibious forces will also be pursued to
include an analysis of what the optimal build cadence is, integra-
tion of advanced data capabilities and the amphibious assault con-
nectors, and how best to support expeditionary basing. The com-
mittee continued its oversight of the DDG–51 Arleigh Burke class
Destroyer program and followed the transition to the Flight III var-
iant that incorporate the new air and missile defense radar. The
committee also monitored the requirements associated with the
new large surface combatant that the Navy indicates will be fielded
in the near future. In addition to the manned platforms, the com-
mittee will review options for the Navy to augment the surface
force structure with both unmanned and optionally manned plat-
forms and will ensure these programs are sufficiently mature be-
fore the start of construction. Finally, the committee reviewed the
combat logistics forces and the Maritime Security Program to en-
sure sufficient capacity is available to support national security ob-
jectives.
As part of this oversight, the committee continued to place a sig-
nificant emphasis on improving affordability in shipbuilding pro-
grams through: ensuring stable requirements; the use of acquisi-
tion best practices; stability within the overall program; increased
reliance on common systems and open architecture; and industrial
base capacity, process, and facility improvements at the shipyards.
Undersea Warfare Programs
The ability to operate freely at sea is one of the most important
enablers of joint and interagency operations, and sea control re-
quires capabilities in all aspects of the maritime domain. There are
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
many challenges to our ability to exercise sea control, perhaps none
as significant as the growing number of nations operating sub-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
70
marines, both advanced diesel-electric and nuclear propelled. Exer-
cising sea control in the undersea domain is essential to maintain-
ing the freedom of navigation in support of U.S. maritime interests.
The committee continued to review the undersea domain to ensure
warfare dominance. Specifically, the committee reviewed short- and
long-term options to reverse the decline in the attack submarine
force structure as well as options to augment the undersea fleet
with unmanned underwater vehicles. The committee also assessed
whether sufficient resources and technological maturity are avail-
able for the recapitalization of the ballistic missile submarine force.
Additionally, the committee monitored the development of the re-
quirements associated with the follow-on attack submarine to the
Virginia class. Finally, the committee assessed the weapons and
sensors employed in the undersea domain to retain maritime domi-
nance, to include the capacity and capabilities of unmanned under-
sea vehicles.
As part of this oversight, the committee placed specific emphasis
on the efficacy of multi-year procurement, rigorous assessment of
requirements, and management of an expanding undersea indus-
trial base capacity.
Military Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Programs
The committee conducted oversight activities on cost, schedule,
and performance outcomes of tactical manned and unmanned aer-
ial intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) systems.
The committee examined the ISR enterprise for balance in inven-
tory, satisfaction of military collection requirements, timeliness and
redundancy of dissemination architecture, and modernization of
analysis and exploitation capabilities for video and imagery. The
committee monitored the Department of Defense’s ISR policy devel-
opment and implementation.
The committee evaluated the Department of Defense’s long-term
ISR architecture modernization and next-generation acquisition
strategy. It further examined the supporting analysis behind pro-
grammatic decisions, the management of risk across ISR collection
capabilities and capacities, and the corresponding resources to
process, exploit, and disseminate raw data and finished analysis.
The committee conducted oversight on improvements made to ISR
transmission and down-link architecture that provide rapid deliv-
ery of collected information supporting timely and effective defense
operations.
The committee’s oversight efforts included the following ISR pro-
grams: RQ–4 Global Hawk unmanned aerial system (UAS) Block
30 and Block 40, MQ–9 Reaper UAS, MQ–1C Gray Eagle UAS, U–
2 aircraft, RC–135 aircraft, Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar
System aircraft, E–3 Airborne Warning and Control System air-
craft, and the Advanced Battle Management System.
Nuclear Forces and Posture
The committee oversaw the atomic energy defense activities of
the Department of Energy and nuclear policies and programs of the
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
Department of Defense to ensure the safety, security, reliability,
and credibility of the U.S. nuclear deterrent. The committee en-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
71
sured that the United States maintains a safe, secure, and reliable
nuclear arsenal to address current and future threats. The com-
mittee conducted oversight of the Department of Energy and the
Department of Defense’s nuclear modernization and sustainment
plans, nuclear deterrence and posture, including programs and
policies included in the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review.
In particular, the committee oversaw funding levels and require-
ments for the nuclear deterrence mission and nuclear enterprise,
including relevant nuclear delivery platforms and their associated
warheads to ensure resources are provided and allocated effectively
and efficiently across Department of Energy and Department of De-
fense, including through budget hearings on these proposed pro-
grams. With regard to the Department of Defense, the committee
emphasized oversight of major acquisition programs that will re-
capitalize U.S. nuclear forces and the supporting complex for dec-
ades into the future, including but not limited to the Ground Based
Strategic Deterrent system, the Long-Range Standoff cruise mis-
sile, and missiles associated with the new Columbia-class sub-
marine. The committee also placed particular emphasis on invest-
ments in nuclear enterprise programs that fall under the purview
of the Department of Energy, including but not limited to infra-
structure investments, warhead life extension programs, stockpile
stewardship programs, stockpile management programs, cost sav-
ings and efficiency initiatives, safety and security, and progress on
the nuclear clean-up activities. The committee held a hearing on
the cause and impacts of delays and cost increases of the B61 life
extension program and W88 alteration program in September 2019,
and included provisions in both the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92) and the William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) on improving oversight of the plutonium
pit production and nuclear weapons acquisition programs. The com-
mittee also initiated discussions on the importance of hiring and
retaining a diverse, world-class workforce, requiring detailed re-
porting in the FY21 NDAA.
In addition, the committee continued oversight of the nuclear
command and control programs that underpin a reliable nuclear
deterrent.
Alongside overseeing and authorizing U.S. nuclear programs, the
committee monitored foreign nuclear weapon development and
modernization programs, holding classified briefings on China and
Russia’s nuclear weapons in November 2019 and on Chinese nu-
clear modernization programs in December 2020, and included re-
quirements for classified reports and an independent report on ad-
versary nuclear weapons programs in the FY21 NDAA.
The committee provided oversight of the U.S. nuclear policy and
posture, extended deterrence policy, arms control activities, and nu-
clear force structure requirements, including impacts on strategic
stability. Continuing efforts to inform dialog on measures to en-
hance deterrence and stability, Public Law 116–92 included a pro-
vision requiring an independent report on benefits and risks of a
potential U.S. posture of no-first-use of nuclear weapons. In addi-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
tion to a hearing by the committee in March 2019 to receive out-
side views on U.S. nuclear posture, the committee held a hearing
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
72
in February 2019 on the value of nuclear arms control, with Sen-
ator Richard Lugar, former Ambassador Alexander Vershbow, and
former Assistant Secretary of State Paula DeSutter. The committee
also held a classified briefing on the Open Skies Treaty in Feb-
ruary 2020, and both Public Law 116–92 and the FY21 NDAA in-
cluded provisions regarding the process and decision to withdraw
from the Open Skies Treaty.
Missile Defense
The committee oversaw the Department of Defense’s efforts to
develop, test, and field layered missile defense capabilities to pro-
tect the United States, its deployed forces, and allies and partners
against missile threats.
The committee continued to place emphasis on cost-effective and
reliable missile defenses that contribute to strategic stability. The
committee conducted oversight on U.S. homeland missile defense
development, focusing on the next generation interceptor program
with provisions in both the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92) and the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (FY21 NDAA), efforts to improve regional missile defense ca-
pabilities, developmental and operational testing, cyber security to
protect Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) data, force struc-
ture and inventory requirements, continued integration of ‘‘left-of-
launch’’ capabilities, and science and technology investments in
areas such as boost-phase intercept, directed energy, space sensor
layer, and continuous improvements to radar discrimination. The
committee focused on the Department’s plans to design and develop
a hypersonic defense capability, and in addition to the technical
and programmatic aspects, continued to refine national missile de-
fense policy through a provision in Public Law 116–92 in light of
these complex and emerging threats.
The committee monitored implementation of the 2019 Missile De-
fense Review by the Department of Defense and opportunities to
strengthen international missile defense cooperation with allies
and partners to defend against ballistic and cruise missiles.
The committee legislated on the roles, responsibilities, and acqui-
sition policies of the Missile Defense Agency and military services
as they relate to missile defense to ensure acquisition account-
ability and that investments in missile defense capability and ca-
pacity are addressing global combatant commander requirements.
The committee continued oversight of the Army’s Lower Tier Air
and Missile Defense System modernization efforts, including the
Patriot weapon system, the Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense
Sensor (as that program transitions to a rapid prototyping effort),
and efforts to improve interoperability of Army and BMDS systems.
Public Law 116–92 included language that ensured the program
had sound acquisition practices in place during the rapid proto-
typing effort, and that requirements were being met in accordance
with operational needs.
The committee monitored progress of the Department of Defense
Conventional Prompt Strike hypersonic offensive efforts across both
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
the Navy and Army programs as potential ‘‘left-of-launch’’ capabili-
ties. The committee initiated policy discussions and included provi-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
73
sions in both Public Law 116–92 and the FY21 NDAA that re-
quired the Department to assess and address the risks of ambi-
guity, miscalculation, and unintended escalation of these types of
weapons.
National Security Space
The committee oversaw the national security space policies and
programs of the Department of Defense, including combat support
agencies and elements of the Department of Defense that are also
part of the intelligence community. The committee continued its
years-long focus on improving the organization and management of
the Department’s space program, and related policies, to posture
the military to maintain our space advantage, address new threats
in space, elevate the focus within the Department on space as a
warfighting domain, and create a culture that recognizes the im-
portance of space for national security. Toward this end, the com-
mittee was intrinsically involved in the establishment of the U.S.
Space Force, building on earlier efforts in the House-passed Na-
tional Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 to establish
a Space Corps, and ultimately establishing the U.S. Space Force as
a separate military service within the Air Force in the National De-
fense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92).
Public Law 116–92 also established a new Assistant Secretary for
Space Policy to elevate space-related policy within the Department
and established a new Assistant Secretary for Space Acquisition
and Integration to increase focus on space acquisition.
In an effort to support new space acquisition frameworks and to
support the use of new commercial architectures and services, in-
cluding the use of proliferated LEO architectures to enhance resil-
ience, and to promote innovation for national security, the com-
mittee held a briefing in May 2019 on the mission and plans of the
Space Development Agency (SDA). Further, the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (FY21 NDAA) established the SDA in statute, mandating its
transfer to the U.S. Space Force by October 2022. The FY21 NDAA
again required the Department to submit a report and plan for a
new space acquisition framework. In further support of innovation
and resilience in space, the committee also held briefings on opti-
mal future space architectures in January 2020 with Dr. Andrew
Cox and on an update on Project Maven in support of the use of
AI to inform and increase the speed of operational awareness and
decisions.
The committee also oversaw the establishment of the Space Com-
mand as a separate geographic combatant command, in support of
increased focus on warfighter requirements, plans, and operations.
The committee monitored current and expected foreign space
threats, and focused on the need for development of effective deter-
rence policies for space. To this end, the committee held several
classified briefings on space threats and adversary space capabili-
ties in March 2019 and in September 2020, and Public Law 116–
92 mandated an independent study to inform effective deterrence
in space. Both Public Law 116–92 and the FY21 NDAA continued
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
to press for measures to increase deterrence and capacity, for ex-
ample mandating the development of terminals that can multi-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
74
global navigation satellite systems to add resilience to precision,
navigation and timing capability and deter an attack on GPS space
assets.
Finally, the committee continued to support increased use of
commercial capabilities, with both Public Law 116–92 and the
FY21 NDAA including provisions to mandate the use of commercial
capabilities with regard to space domain awareness. The FY21
NDAA continued to support competition to ensure cost-effective as-
sured access to space by mandating investments toward phase 3 of
the National Security Space Launch program, and included several
provisions to support small launch capabilities.
Navy and Marine Corps Intelligence, Surveillance, and
Reconnaissance Programs
During the 116th Congress, the committee continued oversight
efforts on the size, composition, capability, and capacity of the De-
partment of Defense’s maritime intelligence, surveillance, and re-
connaissance aircraft force structure. The committee engaged the
Department through classified and unclassified briefings to under-
stand modernization and recapitalization strategy. The committee
engaged the Navy to understand the recapitalization of the remain-
ing P–3C Orion maritime patrol aircraft with the P–8 Poseidon air-
craft. The committee continued to assess the risk in the Navy’s cur-
rent plan to maintain and procure the MQ–4 Triton supported by
section 4101 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA).
The committee also continued to provide oversight of the E–2D
Advanced Hawkeye Airborne Early Warning Command and Con-
trol aircraft as it gains inflight air refueling capability and con-
tinues to replace the E–2C Hawkeye. Advanced unmanned capa-
bility unclassified and classified briefings were held to support and
understand the MQ–8B/C Firescout and new MUX/MALE capabili-
ties for the Marine Corps.
Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations and Electronic Warfare
The committee continued oversight of the Department of De-
fense’s developing Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations (EMSO)
strategy and associated electronic warfare (EW) systems. The com-
mittee engaged with the EMSO Cross Functional Team and mili-
tary service leaders to understand how the Department is identi-
fying requirements, developing policies, and establishing the nec-
essary governance structures to manage the EMSO enterprise. The
committee focused on the Department’s ability to address emerging
EMSO and EW threats and the military services’ efforts to develop
and field next-generation capabilities to counter these threats. Spe-
cifically, the committee examined airborne EW systems, including
the EC–130H Compass Call aircraft, the EC–37B Compass Call re-
host aircraft, the Navy’s Next Generation Jammer airborne elec-
tronic attack capability, and the Army’s Multi-Function EW–Air, as
well as ground-based EW capabilities including the Terrestrial
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
Layer System.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
75
Integrated Air and Missile Defense
The committee conducted oversight on the research, develop-
ment, and procurement of Army and Marine Corps tactical air and
missile defense programs. Specifically, the committee examined the
interim and enduring solutions for the Indirect Fire Protection Ca-
pability, the Integrated Battle Command System, and the Mobile-
Short Range Air Defense capabilities.
INTELLIGENCE AND EMERGING THREATS AND
CAPABILITIES
Intelligence
The committee recognizes the increasingly complex nature of
warfare and the national security imperative of ensuring that the
Defense Intelligence Enterprise is postured to balance intelligence
support to National Defense Strategy priority challenges of con-
fronting strategic competition and ongoing counterterrorism oper-
ations. Over the 116th Congress, the Subcommittee on Intelligence
and Emerging Threats and Capabilities set and pursued an aggres-
sive oversight and legislative agenda for the Defense Intelligence
Enterprise. The subcommittee examined the current and planned
modernization activities, with a focus on developments in machine
learning and artificial intelligence, to ensure the Department of De-
fense is on track to continue creating current, informed
foundational intelligence to support military operations, advanced
weapon systems, and military planners.
To that end, the subcommittee conducted multiple briefings and
hearings with the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the Under
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security (USD(I&S)), and
the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center (JAIC), to monitor progress
in the development and synchronization of artificial intelligence
initiatives, including activities underway at the JAIC; the DIA’s
Machine-assisted Analytic Rapid-repository System (MARS), which
will ultimately underpin every aspect of military operations; and
USD(I&S)’s Project Maven.
The subcommittee examined the organization, functions, and op-
erations of the Defense Intelligence Agency to ensure comprehen-
sive, timely, and objective intelligence support to Department of
Defense plans and operations. The subcommittee provided over-
sight into the formulation and execution of the military intelligence
program. In accordance with section 3038 of title 50, United States
Code, the subcommittee scrutinized the management and execution
of national intelligence program capabilities within Department ac-
tivities to ensure these resources were adequate to satisfy the over-
all intelligence needs of the Department, and appropriately inte-
grated with the intelligence activities of the Department.
The subcommittee held numerous briefings on combatant com-
mand intelligence requirements, oversight processes, and resources.
The subcommittee paid particular attention to these areas during
closed, classified briefings, as well as numerous congressional dele-
gations with members and professional staff. The subcommittee
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
pursued an aggressive oversight plan to address intelligence gaps
in assessing and predicting infectious disease outbreaks such as
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
76
the novel coronavirus, as well as assessing and predicting extreme
weather events to ensure military planners are able to capture that
information to aid in military planning and operations.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116–92) contained a number of provisions aimed at en-
suring the ability of the Department to efficiently manage security
support services, including processing personnel security investiga-
tions, protecting sensitive and classified U.S. government informa-
tion, and guarding against counterintelligence threats to sensitive
national security information and technologies. The subcommittee
examined the transition of the National Background Investigations
Bureau to the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency.
Public Law 116–92 required the Defense Counterintelligence and
Security Agency to submit on a semiannual basis a report outlining
efforts to improve the quality of agency background investigation
submissions, improve both the quality and timeliness of security
clearances and other vetting requests across the Federal Govern-
ment. Upon completion of a fulsome examination of the roles and
missions of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, and to
better reflect the responsibilities of the Under Secretary of Defense
for Intelligence, Public Law 116–92 renamed the position to the
Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security.
Through the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Au-
thorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) and accom-
panying committee report (H. Rept. 116–442), the subcommittee
took steps to address misinformation targeted at U.S. Armed
Forces; established a Climate Security Roundtable to ensure the in-
corporation of artificial intelligence and machine learning into
weather forecasting to enhance military intelligence surrounding
climate change; and increased accountability of Department of De-
fense clandestine activities.
Finally, the subcommittee conducted oversight of all intelligence
organizations, programs, and activities of the Department of De-
fense in accordance with the committee’s jurisdiction. The sub-
committee coordinated, as appropriate, with the House of Rep-
resentatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on mat-
ters related to Department of Defense intelligence and counterintel-
ligence activities in the course of oversight and the authorization
of appropriations for intelligence activities shared by the two com-
mittees.
Science and Technology
In the 116th Congress, the committee worked to ensure the De-
partment of Defense continues to foster a robust and balanced
science and technology (S&T) ecosystem comprised of agencies, of-
fices, laboratories, federally funded research and development cen-
ters, university affiliated research centers, academic partnerships,
test and evaluation entities, and partnerships with the private sec-
tor, including small businesses, in order to deliver the best capa-
bilities to the warfighter in the near, mid, and long term. The Sub-
committee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and Capabilities
conducted oversight of the Department’s S&T activities to ensure
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
planning and execution of investments were aligned with national
strategies and other interagency efforts to maintain technological
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
77
superiority. This included examination of the Department’s S&T in-
vestments, which concerningly had less than zero percent real
growth in the fiscal year 2021 President’s budget request; the De-
partment’s efforts to advance technologies aligned with the Na-
tional Defense Strategy (NDS) and the Under Secretary of Defense
for Research and Engineering’s (USD(R&E)’s) 11 modernization
priorities; and how USD(R&E), the military services, and the many
innovation organizations in the Department advanced these mod-
ernization priorities while protecting the important science and
technology investments in next-generation innovations. The sub-
committee continued its oversight of the performance of the De-
fense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Defense Innovation
Unit, and Strategic Capabilities Office, as well as other service-spe-
cific innovation centers and partnerships with private industry to
ensure coordination, synchronization, transition of technology, and
prudent use of fiscal resources.
The subcommittee encouraged the Department to examine its
S&T strategy and doctrine, concepts of employment, and other or-
ganizing concepts pursued by the military services and the Office
of the Secretary of Defense, including how capabilities contribute to
new security strategies; how they will be supported by rigorous
technical analysis and relevant concepts of employment; and how
the Department will develop plans to transition mature tech-
nologies to the field. For each of the rapid technological advance-
ments outlined in the NDS, and the USD(R&E) modernization pri-
orities, section 232 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92) tasked the Department to
strategically develop policies on how the United States should use
and deploy these future technologies, and how these emerging ca-
pabilities will contribute to new security strategies.
Through Public Law 116–92 and the William M. (Mac) Thorn-
berry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021
(FY21 NDAA), the committee granted dozens of authorities to im-
prove the Department’s S&T workforce; facilities; infrastructure;
access to small businesses, academia, and the tech sector to cham-
pion in-house and extramural innovation for the future of force
modernization, warfighting operational concepts, and acquisition.
The subcommittee continued to encourage the Department to use
the authorities that have been underutilized, and Public Law 116–
92 required the Secretary of Defense to submit a master plan for
implementation of authorities relating to science and technology re-
invention laboratories. The FY21 NDAA includes 10 recommenda-
tions from the National Security Commission on Artificial Intel-
ligence, many focused on helping the Department attract, hire, and
retain a strong technical workforce.
Providing and maintaining the infrastructure, both digital and
brick and mortar, is paramount to attracting the best talent. Sec-
tion 252 of Public Law 116–92 required the Secretary to produce
a master plan to support the Department’s modernization require-
ments, including improvements for the science and technology re-
invention laboratories and the facilities of the Major Range and
Test Facility Base. Additionally, section 231 of Public Law 116–92
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
directed a digital engineering capability and pilot to provide testing
infrastructure and software development platforms to support auto-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
78
mated approaches for testing, evaluation, and deployment, and sec-
tion 836 of the FY21 NDAA would direct the Secretary to
iteratively develop and integrate advanced digital data manage-
ment and analytics capabilities to use data to enable and inform
further development and innovations in models and simulations,
including innovations in automation, artificial intelligence, and
software development.
Ensuring the Department nurture its talent pipeline is vital to
ensuring the Department and the nation’s innovation base has the
technical workforce it will need to strengthen the U.S. military’s
edge over the next few decades. The subcommittee continued its
focus on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
education, and provided direction and authorities to the Depart-
ment to diversify and strengthen the national security workforce.
Section 262 of Public Law 116–92 directed a National Academies
of Sciences study on elevating defense research at Historically
Black Colleges and Universities and Other Minority Institutions
(HBCU/MIs). The FY21 NDAA would encourage Department con-
tractors to participate in STEM in elementary and secondary
schools; enable the Secretary to provide financial assistance, schol-
arships, and fellowships for students at HBCU/MIs; direct a single
organization to have primary responsibility for building cohesion
and collaboration across the Department’s various scholarship and
employment programs; provide part-time and term employment for
university professors and students working in the Defense S&T en-
terprise. The FY21 NDAA would also direct a study on how to bet-
ter attract and retain highly qualified individuals for employment
in DOD who have scientific or technical expertise in critical tech-
nologies and are involved with basic and applied research funded
by the Department.
Further, the current global COVID–19 pandemic underscores the
importance of the subcommittee’s oversight of S&T investments in
countermeasures to adversary capabilities and emerging threats,
such as infectious diseases, biotechnologies, and climate change.
Section 263 of Public Law 116–92 directed a Defense Science Board
study on emerging biotechnologies pertinent to national security.
Section 278 of the FY21 NDAA would direct an assessment and di-
rect comparison of the United States and its adversaries’ capabili-
ties in emerging biotechnologies for national security purposes, in-
cluding applications in material, manufacturing, and health. Sec-
tion 1055 of the FY21 NDAA would reauthorize the National
Oceanographic Partnership Program to promote the national goals
of assuring national security, protecting quality of life, ensuring en-
vironmental stewardship, and strengthening science education and
communication through improved knowledge of the ocean.
Cyberspace Activities and Information Technology
The committee recognizes the ever-increasing cyber threats fac-
ing the nation and the criticality of ensuring that the U.S. Armed
Forces are postured to succeed in cyberspace. Over the 116th Con-
gress, the Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and
Capabilities set and pursued an aggressive oversight and legisla-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
tive agenda for cyber-related matters. This necessitated examina-
tion not only of the Department of Defense’s operations and capa-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
79
bilities, but also to ensure the Department was not compartmen-
talizing its cyber forces and instead creating the necessary linkages
between its cyber operations and operations in the other
warfighting domains. Additionally, this effort requires that the De-
partment is cognizant of and persistently collaborating with other
departments and agencies of the executive branch, to include the
Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, Energy, and Health
and Human Services. The subcommittee focused on ensuring that
the Department of Defense adequately budgeted for and invested
in cyber capabilities, and that these investments aligned correctly
to the nation’s strategic objectives.
Through the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2020 (Public Law 116–92) and accompanying committee report (H.
Rept. 116–333), the subcommittee emphasized measures to improve
congressional oversight of the Department’s actions, operations,
policy and strategy towards cyberspace. This included provisions
mandating a comprehensive framework for the Department’s cyber-
security efforts in assisting the Defense Industrial Base, estab-
lishing a biannual reporting requirement for the Joint Artificial In-
telligence Center, directing a Government Accountability Office
study of the Department’s inventory of Internet Protocol Version 4
addresses, and accounting for all of the Department’s investments
in cybersecurity education programs at the primary, secondary, and
post-secondary levels. Additionally, Public Law 116–92 contained
provisions that refined the definitions and notification standards
for sensitive military cyber operations, and directed a quadrennial
cyber posture review.
Through the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Au-
thorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) and the accom-
panying conference report (H. Rept. 116–617), the subcommittee
made significant headway, not only in improving the posture of the
Department of Defense, but of the entire executive branch through
oversight and legislation built on recommendations from the Na-
tional Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence and the
Cyberspace Solarium Commission. Key provisions in the FY21
NDAA include legislation addressing personnel management au-
thority of the commander of U.S. Cyber Command, authority to ex-
pend operation and maintenance funds for cyber operations-pecu-
liar capability development, strengthening the position of the Prin-
cipal Cyber Advisor, and the authority to establish tailored cyber-
space operations organizations within each of the military services.
Most notably, the FY21 NDAA would establish a National Cyber
Director, Presidentially appointed and Senate-confirmed, to serve
as the principal advisor of the President on matters related to
cyberspace and cybersecurity, and with a remit that spans the de-
partments and agencies of the executive branch.
Information Operations
The committee recognizes that engagement with foreign audi-
ences and a refined understanding of the information environment
is pivotal to navigating the 21st century global security environ-
ment. Whether influencing nation-state adversaries or countering
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
propaganda efforts by violent extremist groups, or identifying and
countering deception or disinformation events, strategic commu-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
80
nication and information operations are critical elements to success
in all domains.
During the 116th Congress, the Subcommittee on Intelligence
and Emerging Threats and Capabilities set and pursued an aggres-
sive oversight and legislative agenda examining the Department of
Defense’s progress in developing and leveraging information oper-
ations (IO) as a means to counter state-sponsored information war-
fare against those adversaries designated by the National Defense
Strategy. Nation-state actors such as China, Russia, North Korea,
and Iran are adept at disinformation campaigns and manipulation
of the information environment. Violent extremist groups like Al
Shabaab, Boko Haram, and the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria
also leverage the information environment to accelerate the
radicalization, and thus recruitment, of vulnerable groups and re-
cruitment opportunities. These violent extremist groups rely upon
social media and encrypted messaging services to plan, finance,
and direct the execution of violent acts of terror.
Both the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2020 (Public Law 116–92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21
NDAA) include provisions addressing these types of malign activi-
ties. Public Law 116–92 directed an annual report regarding the
ongoing establishment of U.S. Special Operations Command’s
(USSOCOM’s) Joint Military Information Support Operations
(MISO) Web Operations Center, focusing on efforts to improve the
effectiveness and efficiency of USSOCOM’s MISO programs while
ensuring coordination with the Department of State’s Global En-
gagement Center to ensure synchronized, cogent information oper-
ations. Further, in the committee report accompanying the Na-
tional Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (H. Rept.
116–120), the committee directed the development of a comprehen-
sive strategy for the development and execution of operations in
the information environment while simultaneously scrutinizing the
posture and resourcing of defense intelligence capabilities to suffi-
ciently support such activities in the information environment. The
FY21 NDAA builds on these efforts and would add training on for-
eign disinformation campaigns and studying cyber exploitation and
online deception of members of the U.S. Armed Forces and their
families.
Protecting Critical Technology and National Security Information
In the 116th Congress, the committee continued its oversight to
ensure the Department of Defense implements policies that pro-
mote a sound economic, political, and strategic environment on
U.S. soil where global collaboration, discovery, innovation, public
institutions, and industry can all thrive. Though the open dialogue
and debate of academia can be anathema to the secrecy relied on
in the Department, it must recognize—and embrace—the competi-
tive advantage America’s free society provides us to out-innovate
and develop better products faster. The United States free society
and open, basic research environment focused on discovery for the
United States—and the world—has, for the last several decades, al-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
lowed our American universities to undertake nothing less than a
talent acquisition program for the U.S. economy.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
81
Through the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2020 (Public Law 116–92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21
NDAA) the Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats
and Capabilities included numerous provisions to address the ini-
tiative to support protection of national security academic research-
ers from undue influence and other security threats initially in-
cluded in section 1286 of the John S. McCain National Defense Au-
thorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232). Section
1299C of the FY21 NDAA would completely replace and update
section 1286 of Public Law 115–232 to mandate the designation of
a government official to act as an academic liaison to work with
academia to develop and execute initiatives to protect Department-
sponsored academic research from undue foreign influence and
threats; clarify that the initiatives are intended to be developed
and executed with all appropriate academic research institutions;
mandate the establishment of requirements for briefings on espio-
nage risks to appropriate senior academic officials; clarify require-
ments on the development of a list of foreign talent programs that
pose a threat to U.S. national security interests; establish addi-
tional procedures, consistent with government best practices and
overseen by the designated academic liaison, for enhanced informa-
tion sharing between the government and academic institutions
with respect to fundamental research programs; and mandate addi-
tional reporting on lists of academic institutions and foreign threat
programs of concern to the Congress and the public.
Additionally, the FY21 NDAA would create an interagency work-
ing group led by the Office of Science and Technology Policy and
would direct a National Academies of Sciences-hosted roundtable
with academia and others to tackle issues of foreign influence,
cyber-attacks, theft, and espionage. Both teams were directed to de-
velop best practices for Federal research agencies and grantees,
while accounting for the importance of the open exchange of ideas
and the international talent required for scientific progress and
American leadership in science and technology. Additionally, the
subcommittee partnered with the House of Representatives Com-
mittee on Science, Space, and Technology and Committee on En-
ergy and Commerce, as well as with the Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation and Committee on Energy
and Natural Resources to include a provision which would require
disclosure of funding sources in applications for research and devel-
opment awards from any Federal research agency.
Sensitive Military Operations
Throughout the 116th Congress, the committee continued exten-
sive oversight of sensitive military operations conducted by the De-
partment of Defense outside of Afghanistan, Iraq, or Syria in ac-
cordance with section 130f of title 10, United States Code. As ap-
propriate, oversight is conducted in classified forums.
The Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and
Capabilities focused particular attention to the legal, policy, oper-
ational, and funding authorities, including section 127e of title 10,
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
United States Code, associated with such operations throughout
the 116th Congress. In the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
82
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA), the
subcommittee modified the existing reporting requirements to en-
sure increased transparency and timely notifications to Congress
regarding the transition or termination of any activities under said
authority and directed a parallel review by the Comptroller Gen-
eral of the United States regarding the conduct of the 127e author-
ity.
The committee believes in the deliberate application of military
force under the appropriate authorities and direction from the
President and the Department of Defense. As such, the committee
significantly enhanced oversight of military operations and activi-
ties by directing that the Department provide all execute orders
upon request by the committee for review. Now codified in section
113 of title 10, United States Code, as directed by section 1744 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Pub-
lic Law 116–92), the Secretary of Defense must provide copies of
each execute order upon request as well as a quarterly report iden-
tifying and summarizing all execute orders approved by the Sec-
retary or the commander of a combatant command in effect for the
Department of Defense as those operating principles framing mili-
tary operations.
In addition to enhancing oversight of those operating principles
establishing military operations and activities, in the committee re-
port accompanying the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National De-
fense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (H. Rept. 116–442),
the committee also directed a comprehensive review and report by
the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a review
of U.S. Special Operations Command’s (USSOCOM’s) structure and
organization of those forces aligned or assigned to the command to
increase transparency and understanding of USSOCOM’s expand-
ing force structure, to include the size and influence of the theater
special operations commands (TSOCs).
Further, building upon the policy to reduce the likelihood of civil-
ian casualties resulting from military operations as included in the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public
Law 115–91) and the John S. McCain National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232), the sub-
committee continued oversight efforts by enhancing civilian cas-
ualty policy responsibilities within the Department and further di-
rected the modification of reporting requirements related to such
civilian casualty policies of the Department of Defense in Public
Law 116–92 as a means to increase public transparency and focus
accountability. Section 1721 of Public Law 116–92 further directed
an independent review of Department of Defense standards, proc-
esses, procedures, and policy relating to civilian casualties result-
ing from United States military operations as a means to increase
transparency and accountability of potential consequences resulting
from military operations.
The committee believes in the importance of the development of
a professional and ethical force to successfully execute the missions
required of special operations. Whether countering violent extre-
mism or competing below the level of armed conflict with state ac-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
tors, the committee recognizes that consistent, strong leadership is
critical for the comportment of such an elite force, and thus, the
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
83
subcommittee prioritized building upon the efforts of section 922 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Pub-
lic Law 114–328) to strengthen civilian oversight of special oper-
ations.
The subcommittee also focused efforts on ensuring that
USSOCOM acts upon the findings and implements the rec-
ommendations from the 2020 USSOCOM Comprehensive Review
regarding the professionalism and ethics of special operations
forces, directing regular updates on the status of such implementa-
tion in section 599 of the FY21 NDAA.
Irregular Warfare
The committee acknowledges that malign nation-state actors and
violent extremist groups employ both military and non-military
means such as surrogates, cyber operations, disinformation cam-
paigns, and political bribes to accomplish their desired end states.
These hybrid warfare tactics occur in that grey zone below the
threshold of armed conflict, and require the U.S. Armed Forces to
confront these malign actors through specialized operational au-
thorities and unconventional activities.
During the 116th Congress, the Subcommittee on Intelligence
and Emerging Threats and Capabilities received briefings on the
publication of the Irregular Warfare Annex to the 2018 National
Defense Strategy, and conducted oversight engagements to better
understand how U.S. Special Operations Command, with oversight
of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and
Low Intensity Conflict (ASD SO/LIC), will adjust resources and ca-
pabilities to support the Department’s efforts towards great power
competition.
The subcommittee conducted oversight of the Department of De-
fense’s planning for and use of the operational authority provided
by section 1202 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fis-
cal Year 2018 (Public Law 115–91). Section 1202 provides the De-
partment limited authority to provide support to foreign forces, ir-
regular forces, groups, or individuals engaged in supporting or fa-
cilitating ongoing and authorized irregular warfare operations by
U.S. special operations forces.
In alignment with U.S. Special Operations Command’s progress
in prioritizing its great power competition mission with the need to
maintain focus on countering violent extremism, the subcommittee
authorized an extension for the use of the authority through 2023
in section 1207 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92). Further, after rigorous oversight
and focused engagements with the Department, the subcommittee
further authorized an increase in the resourcing specific to this au-
thority while modifying reporting requirements to increase trans-
parency regarding the partnered forces’ adherence to human rights
law in the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Author-
ization Act for Fiscal Year 2021.
Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
Over the past few years, both Russia and North Korea employed
chemical weapon nerve agents. In Syria, pro-regime and Islamic
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
84
State of Iraq and Syria forces used chemical weapons on civilian
populations to achieve their tactical and strategic objectives. Ad-
vances in biotechnology, gene sequencing, gene editing, and syn-
thetic biology have lowered the barriers of entry for countries and
individuals acting with nefarious intent—or even just by chance—
to produce biological agents in a scope and scale not previously en-
countered. These and other advances exacerbate the complexity of
the world’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD) threats, and the
United States ability to counter them.
During the 116th Congress, and in a time when the world is
struggling to respond to the rapid spread of the highly infectious
COVID–19 pandemic, the Subcommittee on Intelligence and
Emerging Threats and Capabilities focused on efforts of the organi-
zations under its oversight to advance the collective fight against
the virus. The subcommittee held multiple briefings with the De-
fense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the Defense
Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), and the Chemical Biological De-
fense Program (CBDP) on their efforts to provide treatments, vac-
cines, tests for diagnoses, and other technologies to address the im-
pact of the virus. The subcommittee supported the increase of
CARES Act funding for DARPA to surge on pandemic response,
and encouraged the CBDP to be a key partner in the fight against
COVID–19. DARPA worked, as it did for Ebola, to develop and de-
liver technologies and medical countermeasures to ensure that our
military can maintain operational readiness. CBDP’s Medical Pro-
gram funds and manages efforts to develop medical counter-
measures, vaccines, therapeutics, and pre-treatments. Similarly,
the Physical Program funds and manages efforts to develop surveil-
lance and detection technologies, diagnostics, personal protective
equipment, and decontamination systems. To prepare against po-
tential unknown threats, CBDP built expertise and capabilities to
address novel pathogens, which made it an ideal program to sup-
port the fight against the novel coronavirus.
The Defense Threat Reduction Agency, through its execution of
the Department of Defense’s Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR)
Biological Threat Reduction Program (BTRP) and its Technical
Reachback Analysis Cell, received foreign partner requests for pre-
paredness and detection including providing biosafety, biosecurity,
and bio-surveillance support to aid in detection, diagnosis, report-
ing, and modeling related to the COVID–19 outbreak. There were
many good examples of BTRP-trained local professionals in coun-
tries like Guinea, Liberia, Cape Verde, Jordan, and Thailand who
diagnosed and confirmed the first cases of COVID–19 in their coun-
tries. Despite these successes, the fiscal year 2021 President’s
budget request drastically slashed the CTR program by over one-
third, and the subcommittee worked to ensure that the William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) would restore over $120.0 million to this
important effort.
Indeed, the current coronavirus outbreak and global pandemic
underscores the importance of scientific research and preparedness
across the interagency for our national and economic security. To
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
that end, in the committee report accompanying the William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
85
Year 2021 (H. Rept. 116–442), the subcommittee directed the
Comptroller General of the United States to assess the Depart-
ment’s strategy and planning for research and development and for
emerging threats, and particularly biological threats, and for incor-
porating those threats into broader planning and exercise mecha-
nisms.
The subcommittee partnered with the House Committee on For-
eign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific, and Nonprolifera-
tion to jointly host a hearing on biosecurity this fall while the
COVID–19 pandemic was worsening across the United States. Sec-
tion 1299I of the FY21 NDAA would direct the Secretary of De-
fense, in consultation with the Secretary of State, to enter into an
arrangement with the National Academy of Sciences to conduct an
assessment of the United States strategies for preventing, coun-
tering, and responding to nuclear, biological, and chemical ter-
rorism. The subcommittee partnered with the House Committee on
Oversight and Reform and Committee on Energy and Commerce,
and the many corresponding Senate committees to include section
364 of the FY21 NDAA, which would require all relevant depart-
ments and agencies to review and update the National Biodefense
Implementation Plan. Additionally, section 363 of the FY21 NDAA
would improve oversight of Federal biodefense programs by requir-
ing the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the
Secretary of Health and Human Services to provide integrated bio-
defense budget submissions and comprehensive analysis of all Fed-
eral biodefense programs annually.
Regarding the concern as to whether U.S. forces are prepared for
a significant state-level WMD event, and are trained and equipped
to successfully operate and perform in a contaminated environ-
ment, section 1259 of the FY21 NDAA would require the Secretary
of Defense to implement the Government Accountability Office rec-
ommendations on the preparedness of U.S. forces to counter North
Korean chemical and biological weapons. The subcommittee also
pushed on whether U.S. Forces Korea planners have access to the
relevant intelligence on North Korean chemical and biological
weapons sites needed to effectively plan—and if necessary, con-
duct—counter-WMD operations.
ADDITIONAL OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES OF THE FULL
COMMITTEE
Full Committee Hearings and Briefings
During the 116th Congress, the committee held a series of budg-
et posture hearings and briefings in preparation for the fiscal year
2020 and fiscal year 2021 budgets. The hearings and briefings,
combined with the committee’s responsibility for assembling the
annual defense authorization bill, are a central element in the dis-
charge of the committee’s oversight responsibilities. In upholding
its responsibilities to mitigate waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanage-
ment of Federal Government programs, and pursuant to House
rule XI, clause 2(n), (o), and (p), the committee met several times
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
to conduct oversight of Department of Defense activities, as noted
elsewhere in this report.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
86
The committee convened a hearing on March 26, 2019, to receive
testimony from the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff on the fiscal year 2020 budget request. To further
inform its consideration of the fiscal year 2020 budget request, the
committee held hearings on April 2, 2019 and on April 10, 2019
with military senior leaders to inform members of the state of the
military. Additionally, the committee convened a hearing to ascer-
tain from members of Congress their national defense priorities for
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, which
took place on April 3, 2019. Following these budget hearings, on
May 16, 2019, the committee convened a hearing to receive testi-
mony from the Comptroller of each branch of the military about the
Financial Improvement and Audit Remediation Plan at the Depart-
ment of Defense.
To inform its consideration of the fiscal year 2021 budget re-
quest, the committee received testimony from the Secretary of De-
fense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on February
26, 2020. Receiving testimony from the Secretaries of the military
departments during three hearings on February 27, 2020, March 3,
2020, and March 4, 2020 further updated the committee about and
detailed the fiscal year 2021 budget request.
The committee sought to continually update members on U.S. re-
lations and policy around the world, to tailor the committee’s over-
sight and agenda. Topics included overviews of national security
challenges in the Greater Middle East, Africa, Europe, the Indo-Pa-
cific Region, and South America. In keeping with the committee’s
goal and record to be proactive in addressing threats and strategy,
the committee convened a series of hearings and briefings through-
out the 116th Congress to examine approaches to counterterrorism,
nuclear deterrence policy and posture, the role of allies and part-
ners in U.S. military strategy and operations, and the U.S. military
mission in Afghanistan and the implication of the Peace Process on
U.S. involvement. Competition was specifically addressed in hear-
ings on the Department of Defense’s roles in competing with China
and long-term major state competition. Hearings focused on other
policies ranged from the Department of Defense’s support to the
Southern Border to authorities and roles related to civilian law en-
forcement.
To better understand strategic reassurance and deterrence activi-
ties across the globe, the committee also held frequent briefings to
receive intelligence and operational updates on threat develop-
ments. These briefings informed the committee of policies toward
Iran and security updates on the Korean Peninsula, Africa, coali-
tion service members in Afghanistan and ISIS in Iraq and Syria.
They also informed the committee’s legislative initiatives in readi-
ness, capabilities, infrastructure, and technology oversight to en-
sure that the U.S. Armed Forces remain capable of addressing cur-
rent and emerging conventional and unconventional threats.
In 2020, to address the COVID–19 pandemic, the committee met
in person and remotely to hear testimony from Department of De-
fense officials. Hearings informed members of the Department of
Defense COVID–19 response to defense industrial base challenges,
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
the COVID–19 pandemic response from the Department of the
Navy, the leverage of the Defense Production Act and supporting
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
87
the Defense Industrial base during the pandemic, the Department
of Defense’s update on COVID–19 testing, research, and vaccine
development, the Defense Intelligence Agency’s National Center for
Medical Intelligence on COVID–19, the Department of Defense and
Defense Logistics Agency participation in the whole of government
response to COVID–19, and how the Department of Defense is pro-
viding force protection during the COVID–19 pandemic.
In response to advanced technology development and the chang-
ing global landscape of defense, the committee established the Fu-
ture of Defense Task Force in October 2019. The Task Force held
events to address theories of victory and innovative concepts for na-
tional security, supercharging the innovation base, biosecurity, Chi-
nese research and development, and unidentified aerial phe-
nomena.
Budget Oversight
On March 13, 2019, the chairman of the Committee on Armed
Services forwarded his views and estimates regarding the budget
request for the National Defense Budget Function (050) for Fiscal
Year 2020 to the Committee on the Budget.
As requested by the chairman of the Budget Committee, the com-
mittee outlined its legislative priorities for the upcoming year. The
committee noted that the annual National Defense Authorization
Act contained all the essential authorities required to sustain our
military and is the chief mechanism through which Congress exer-
cises its Article I, Section 8 responsibilities. The committee an-
nounced its intent to enact a national defense authorization bill for
fiscal year 2020 as it had for 58 consecutive years. However, the
committee noted with concern that the enactment of the Bipartisan
Budget Act of 2018 provided for increases in discretionary spending
levels for 2018 and 2019, but sequestration levels remained in ef-
fect for fiscal years 2020 and 2021. The committee expressed sup-
port for an increase in Budget Control Act caps in order to advance
the country’s interests across the full range of policy, but stressed
that increases to national defense spending should be part of a
comprehensive approach that included an end to sequestration
across all budget functions, increased revenues, and a return to
regular order in the appropriations process. The committee identi-
fied that it will continue the practice of conducting a significant
number of hearings, briefings, and roundtable discussions in order
to better understand the current security environment, evaluate
proposals for reform, and receive independent feedback on the mili-
tary requirements necessary to support a robust strategy. The com-
mittee’s ranking member did not join the chairman in his views
and estimates.
On March 23, 2020, the chairman of the Committee on Armed
Services forwarded his views and estimates regarding the budget
request for the National Defense Budget Function (050) for Fiscal
Year 2021 to the Committee on the Budget. At the time, the Presi-
dent had announced a topline of $740.5 billion for fiscal year 2021
discretionary budget authority for national defense. This budget
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
submission complied with the limitations mandated by the Bipar-
tisan Budget Act of 2019 (Public Law 116–37).
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
88
As requested by the chairman of the Budget Committee, the com-
mittee outlined its legislative priorities for the upcoming year. As
in the prior year, the committee noted that the annual National
Defense Authorization Act contained all the essential authorities
required to sustain our military and is the chief mechanism
through which Congress exercises its Article I, Section 8 respon-
sibilities. Likewise, the committee announced its intent to enact a
national defense authorization bill for fiscal year 2021 as it had for
the preceding 59 consecutive years. The committee identified that
it will continue the practice of conducting a significant number of
hearings, briefings, and roundtable discussions in order to better
understand the current security environment, evaluate proposals
for reform, and receive independent feedback on the military re-
quirements necessary to support a robust strategy. The committee’s
ranking member did not join the chairman in his views and esti-
mates.
ADDITIONAL OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES OF THE
SUBCOMMITTEES AND TASK FORCE
Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and
Capabilities
The Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and
Capabilities conducted additional oversight of specific issues across
the portfolio, most notably issues pertaining to civilian casualties
resulting from U.S. military operations; pandemic preparedness;
U.S. capabilities to counter unmanned aircraft systems; 5G devel-
opment and spectrum management; matters pertaining to artificial
intelligence and machine learning, working closely with the Na-
tional Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence; and a com-
prehensive effort to synchronize cyber policy, in partnership with
the Cyber Solarium Commission.
The subcommittee considered and reported dozens of legislative
provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92), and the William M. (Mac) Thorn-
berry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021
(FY21 NDAA). The FY21 NDAA would direct an acceleration of de-
velopments in capabilities to counter unmanned aircraft systems to
ensure the protection of U.S. Armed Forces; provide comprehensive
reform to accelerate 5G communications development by the De-
partment; included 10 recommendations from the National Security
Commission on Artificial Intelligence; creates a National Cyber Di-
rector to ensure the Executive Branch is synchronizes to defense
our critical infrastructure. In the conference report accompanying
the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (H. Rept. 116–617), the conferees directed
the Government Accountability Office to conduct an assessment of
the capabilities and capacity of the National Center for Medical In-
telligence to effectively forecast or warn of foreign health threats.
A formal list of the Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging
Threats and Capabilities is provided below:
On February 7, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
on ‘‘Long-Range Emerging Threats Facing the United States: Impli-
cations for National Security.’’
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
89
On February 26, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testi-
mony on ‘‘Department of Defense Information Technology, Cyberse-
curity, and Information Assurance.’’
On February 28, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testi-
mony on the ‘‘Cyber Mission Force and Military Operations in
Cyberspace: A Framework for Oversight.’’
On March 7, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
the ‘‘Department of Defense’s Protecting Critical Technology Task
Force.’’
On March 13, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony
on the ‘‘Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request for U.S. Cyber Command
and Operations in Cyberspace.’’
On March 28, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony
on the ‘‘Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request for Department of De-
fense Science and Technology Programs: Maintaining a Robust Eco-
system for Our Technological Edge.’’
On April 3, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
‘‘Reviewing Department of Defense Strategy, Policy, and Programs
for Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction for Fiscal Year 2020.’’
On April 9, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
the ‘‘Evolution, Transformation, and Sustainment: A Review of the
Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request for U.S. Special Operations
Forces and Command.’’
On May 9, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive a classified
briefing on the ‘‘Counterterrorism Quarterly.’’
On September 10, 2019, the Subcommittee met, in coordination
with the House Oversight Committee, Subcommittee on National
Security, to receive testimony on ‘‘Securing the Nation’s Internet
Architecture.’’
On September 26, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive classi-
fied briefing on the ‘‘Counterterrorism Quarterly.’’
On October 16, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony,
in coordination with the Subcommittee on Readiness, on ‘‘Resil-
iency of Military Installations to Emerging Threats.’’
On October 31, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive a classi-
fied briefing on ‘‘Cyber Operations Quarterly.’’
On November 13, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive a classi-
fied briefing on ‘‘Fifth Generation (5G) Information and Commu-
nications Technologies.’’
On December 11, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testi-
mony on ‘‘Climate Change in the Era of Strategic Competition.’’
On January 9, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a classified
briefing on ‘‘Cyber Operations Quarterly.’’
On January 30, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a classi-
fied briefing on ‘‘Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems.’’
On February 11, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testi-
mony on ‘‘Reviewing Department of Defense Strategy, Policy, and
Programs for Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction for Fiscal
Year 2021.’’
On February 6, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a classi-
fied briefing on ‘‘Counterterrorism Quarterly.’’
On February 26, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a classi-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
fied briefing on ‘‘National Defense Strategy: Emerging Threats, Ca-
pabilities, and Investments.’’
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
90
On March 4, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
the ‘‘Fiscal Year 2021 Budget Request for U.S. Cyber Command
and Operations in Cyberspace.’’
On March 5, 2020, the subcommittee received a classified brief-
ing on ‘‘Manda Bay.’’
On March 11, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony
on ‘‘Reviewing Department of Defense Science and Technology
Strategy, Policy, and Programs for Fiscal Year 2021: Maintaining
a Robust Ecosystem for Our Technological Edge.’’
On April 9, 2020, the subcommittee received a briefing from the
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency regarding the
‘‘COVID–19 Pandemic.’’
On April 17, 2020, the subcommittee held a briefing on
‘‘Censored Contagion: How Information on the Coronavirus is Man-
aged.’’
On April 30, 2020, the subcommittee held a briefing on ‘‘Defense
Threat Reduction Agency in the COVID–19 Pandemic.’’
On June 11, 2020, the subcommittee received a briefing on the
‘‘Air Force Venture Program.’’
On July 30, 2020, the subcommittee held a hearing to receive
testimony on ‘‘Review of the Recommendations of the Cyberspace
Solarium Commission.’’
On September 17, 2020, the subcommittee held a hearing to re-
ceive testimony on ‘‘Interim Review of the National Security Com-
mission on Artificial Intelligence Effort and Recommendations.’’
On October 2, 2020, the subcommittee held a hearing, in coordi-
nation with the House Foreign Affairs Committee Subcommittee on
Asia, the Pacific, and Non-proliferation, to receive testimony on
‘‘Strengthening Biological Security: Traditional Threats and Emerg-
ing Challenges.’’
On November 19, 2020, the subcommittee held a briefing on ‘‘De-
partment of Defense IT Requirements in the COVID–19 Pan-
demic.’’
On December 4, 2020, the subcommittee held a briefing on ‘‘Fifth
Generation (5G) Information and Communications Technologies.’’
In addition to these events, the subcommittee’s plans for hear-
ings on ‘‘Department of Defense Information Technology, Cyberse-
curity, and Information Assurance’’ and ‘‘FY21 Budget Request for
Special Operations Command’’ were cancelled as a result of
COVID–19 impacts on congressional operations. In lieu of hearings,
the subcommittee received formal written testimony from Special
Operations Command and held a remote teleconference briefing
with the Department’s Chief Information Officer.
Subcommittee on Military Personnel
The Subcommittee on Military Personnel continued oversight of
military personnel, military personnel policy, the Military Health
System, family programs, as well military pay and compensation.
The hearings and briefings held by the subcommittee directly in-
formed its oversight, legislative provisions, and authorization of ap-
propriations included in the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92) and the William M. (Mac)
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021. A list of formal subcommittee events is provided below:
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
91
On February 13, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testi-
mony on the military service academies’ action plans to address the
results of the sexual assault and violence report at the military
service academies.
On February 27, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testi-
mony on transgender service in the military policy.
On March 12, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony
on outside perspectives on military personnel policy.
On March 27, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony
on reserve component duty status reform.
On April 2, 2019 the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
examining the role of the commander in sexual assault prosecu-
tions.
On April 30, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
the Feres doctrine and whether it is a policy in need of reform.
On May 16, 2019 the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
military personnel management.
On May 21, 2019, the subcommittee met jointly with the Sub-
committee on Health of the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs
to receive testimony on understanding the problem of military and
veteran suicide and preparing for the future.
On June 4, 2019, the subcommittee met to mark-up H.R. 2500,
to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2020 for military activi-
ties of the Department of Defense and for military construction, to
prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for
other purposes.
On September 18, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testi-
mony on shattered families, shattered service: taking military do-
mestic violence out of the shadows.
On October 23, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive a briefing
from enlisted spouses on financial literacy and military family sup-
port.
On October 30, 2019, the subcommittee met jointly with the Sub-
committee on Technology Modernization of the House Committee
on Veterans’ Affairs to receive a briefing on the Electronic Health
Record program.
On December 5, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony
on Military Health System reform.
On December 10, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testi-
mony on diversity in recruiting and retention and increasing diver-
sity in the military.
On February 5, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony
on the Exceptional Family Member Program.
On February 11, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testi-
mony on incidents of white supremacy in the military.
On May 19, 2020, the subcommittee received a briefing on the
Army’s ENGAGE program and preventing military suicide.
On May 21, 2020, the subcommittee received a briefing from out-
side experts on the Department of Defense’s response to the
COVID–19 pandemic.
On June 16, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
racial disparity in the military justice system.
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
On June 23, 2020, the subcommittee met to mark-up H.R. 6395,
to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2021 for military activi-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
92
ties of the Department of Defense and for military construction, to
prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for
other purposes.
On July 23, 2020, the subcommittee received a briefing on the
Army Criminal Investigation Command’s investigation into the
SPC Vanessa Guillen case.
On July 29, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
the military’s #MeToo moment: an examination of sexual harass-
ment and perceived retaliation in the Department of Defense and
at Fort Hood.
On September 11, 2020, the subcommittee received a briefing
from the Department of Defense and outside experts on the Depart-
ment’s response to the COVID–19 pandemic.
On December 9, 2020, the subcommittee received testimony on
the findings and recommendations of the Fort Hood Independent
Review Committee.
Subcommittee on Readiness
The Subcommittee on Readiness continued oversight of military
readiness, training, logistics, and maintenance issues; military con-
struction, installations, shipyard repair facilities, and family hous-
ing issues; energy and environmental policy and programs of the
Department of Defense; and civilian personnel and service con-
tracting issues. The hearings and briefings held by the sub-
committee directly informed subcommittee oversight, legislative
provisions, and authorization of appropriations included in the Na-
tional Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law
116–92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021. A list of formal sub-
committee events is provided below:
On February 6, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified brief-
ing on ‘‘How Readiness is Assessed and the Current State of Mili-
tary Readiness.’’
On February 14, 2019, the subcommittee held a roundtable with
military spouses to hear of their experiences and concerns with
privatized military family housing.
On February 26, 2019, the subcommittee, along with the Sub-
committee on Seapower and Projection Forces, met to receive testi-
mony on ‘‘Naval Surface Forces Readiness: Are Navy Reforms Ade-
quate?’’
On March 13, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony
on ‘‘Ensuring Resiliency of Military Installations and Operations in
Response to Climate Changes.’’
On March 27, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified brief-
ing on ‘‘DOD’s Joint Logistics Enterprise and Future Concerns for
Survivable Combat Logistics.’’
On April 4, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
‘‘Mismanaged Military Family Housing Programs: What is the Re-
covery Plan?’’
On May 1, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
‘‘Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request for Military Construction, En-
ergy, and Environmental Programs.’’
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
On May 9, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
‘‘Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request for Military Readiness.’’
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
93
On July 26, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified briefing
on the Quarterly Readiness Report to Congress.
On September 26, 2019, the subcommittee met for a briefing on
‘‘Ground Vehicle Mishaps: Causes, Effects and Solutions.’’
On October 16, 2019, the subcommittee, along with the Sub-
committee on Intelligence, Emerging Threats and Capabilities, met
to receive testimony on ‘‘Resiliency of Military Installations to
Emerging Threats.’’
On October 22, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony
on ‘‘Ship and Submarine Maintenance: Cost and Schedule Chal-
lenges.’’
On November 13, 2019, the subcommittee, along with the Sub-
committee on Tactical Air and Land Forces, met to receive testi-
mony on ‘‘F–35 Program Update: Sustainment, Production, and Af-
fordability Challenges.’’
On November 14, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive a brief-
ing on ‘‘Security Clearances: How Reforms May Improve the Proc-
ess.’’
On November 21, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testi-
mony on ‘‘The Department of Defense Organic Industrial Base:
Challenges, Solutions and Readiness Impacts.’’
On December 5, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony
on ‘‘Privatized Housing: Are Conditions Improving for Our Military
Families?’’
On January 14, 2020, the subcommittee, along with the Sub-
committee on Tactical Air and Land Forces, received a briefing on
the ‘‘F–35 Program and Sustainment Update.’’
On February 5, 2020, the subcommittee, along with the Sub-
committee on Seapower and Projection Forces, met to receive testi-
mony on ‘‘Update on Navy and Marine Corps Readiness in the Pa-
cific in the Aftermath of Recent Mishaps.’’
On February 7, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a classi-
fied briefing on the Quarterly Readiness Report to Congress.
On February 12, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testi-
mony on ‘‘Land Based Ranges: Building Military Readiness While
Protecting Natural and Cultural Resources.’’
On March 3, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
the ‘‘FY21 Air Force and Space Force Readiness Posture.’’
On March 11, 2020, the subcommittee, along with the Sub-
committee on Seapower and Projection Forces, met to receive testi-
mony on ‘‘U.S. Transportation Command and Maritime Adminis-
tration: State of the Mobility Enterprise.’’
On March 12, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony
on the ‘‘FY21 Navy and Marine Corps Readiness Posture.’’
On May 20, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a briefing on
‘‘COVID–19 Impacts on Military Training and Readiness.’’
On May 28, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a briefing on
‘‘COVID–19 Impacts on Shipyard and Depot Operations and Pro-
duction.’’
On July 28, 2020, the subcommittee, along with the Sub-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
committee on Seapower and Projection Forces, met to receive a
briefing on the Fire Aboard USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD–6).
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
94
On September 15, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testi-
mony on ‘‘Addressing the Legacy of Department of Defense Use of
PFAS: Protecting Our Communities and Implementing Reform.’’
On October 1, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a briefing
on ‘‘Contested Logistics Requirements in Support of the National
Defense Strategy.’’
On December 3, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a briefing
on ‘‘the Findings and Recommendations of the National Commis-
sion on Military Aviation Safety.’’
In addition to these formal events, the committee’s plans for
hearings on the ‘‘FY21 Army Readiness Posture’’ and ‘‘FY21 En-
ergy, Installations, and Environment Posture’’ were cancelled as a
result of COVID–19 impacts on congressional operations. In lieu of
hearings, the subcommittee received written statements from the
witnesses and exchanged a series of questions for the record that
were responded to in writing.
Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces
The Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces provided
oversight of the Department of the Navy, the Department of the
Air Force and the Department of the Army. The subcommittee held
multiple hearings and briefings with officials from each of the mili-
tary services. The subcommittee oversaw Navy shipbuilding pro-
grams which included new acquisition vessels as well as the mod-
ernization of existing fleet vessels. Oversight of Navy non-tactical
aviation was also provided. In its oversight of the Air Force, the
subcommittee oversaw the acquisition and modernization of all aer-
ial refueling aircraft, bomber aircraft and tactical and strategic air-
craft. Finally, the subcommittee provided oversight of the Army’s
watercraft fleet. A list of formal subcommittee events is provided
below:
On February 14, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified
briefing on ‘‘Sealift ad Airlift Requirements Review.’’
On February 26, 2019, the subcommittee, along with the Sub-
committee on Readiness, met to receive testimony on ‘‘Naval Sur-
face Forces Readiness: Are Navy Reforms Adequate?’’
On February 27, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified
briefing on ‘‘U.S. Air Force 101.’’
On March 7, 2019, the subcommittee, along with the Sub-
committee on Readiness, met to receive testimony on ‘‘U.S. Trans-
portation Command and Maritime Administration: State of the Mo-
bility Enterprise.’’
On March 14, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony
on ‘‘Department of the Air Force Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request
for Seapower and Projection Forces.’’
On March 26, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony
on ‘‘Department of the Navy Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request for
Seapower and Projection Forces.’’
On April 30, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified briefing
on ‘‘Navy Force Structure Assessment and Navy and Marine Corps:
How We Fight.’’
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
On May 8, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified briefing
on ‘‘B–21 Program and Budget Briefing.’’
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
95
On September 26, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified
briefing on ‘‘The National Reconnaissance Office.’’
On November 13, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified
briefing on ‘‘Building the Bomber and Mobility Force the Air Force
Needs.’’
On November 20, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified
briefing on ‘‘Aircraft Carrier Force Structure: Update on In Service
and New Construction Aircraft Carriers.’’
On January 29, 2020, the subcommittee met for a briefing on
‘‘Sealift Turbo Activation Exercise Briefing.’’
On February 5, 2020, the subcommittee, along with the Readi-
ness Subcommittee, met to receive testimony on ‘‘Update on Navy
and Marine Corps Readiness in the Pacific in the Aftermath of Re-
cent Mishaps.’’
On February 27, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testi-
mony on ‘‘Air Force Projection Forces Aviation Programs and Capa-
bilities Related to the 2021 President’s Budget.’’
On March 4, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
‘‘Department of the Navy Fiscal Year 2021 Budget Request for
Seapower and Projection Forces.’’
On March 11, 2020, the subcommittee, along with the Sub-
committee on Readiness, met to receive testimony on ‘‘Sealift and
Mobility Requirements in Support of the National Defense Strat-
egy.’’
On May 29, 2020, the subcommittee met for a briefing on ‘‘The
Maritime Security Program.’’
On June 4, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
‘‘Future Force Structure Requirements for the United States
Navy.’’
On July 28, 2020, the subcommittee, along with the Sub-
committee on Readiness, met for a briefing on ‘‘The Fire Aboard
USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD–6).’’
Subcommittee on Strategic Forces
The Subcommittee on Strategic Forces continued oversight of De-
partment of Defense and Department of Energy policy related to
strategic deterrence, strategic stability, nuclear weapons, strategic
and nuclear arms control, nonproliferation, nuclear safety, missile
defense, and space; Department of Defense programs and accounts
related to nuclear weapons, strategic missiles, nuclear command
and control systems, Department of Defense intelligence space,
space systems and services of the military departments, and inter-
mediate and long-range missile defense systems; and Department
of Energy national security programs and accounts. In total, the
Subcommittee held a total of 23 formal hearings and briefings dur-
ing the 116th Congress. These hearings and briefings directly in-
formed subcommittee oversight, legislative provisions, and author-
ization of appropriations included in the National Defense Author-
ization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92) and the Wil-
liam M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
Fiscal Year 2021. A formal list of subcommittee events is provided
below:
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
96
On February 14, 2019, the subcommittee, along with members of
the full committee, met for a classified briefing update on the ‘‘Con-
ventional Prompt Strike (CPS) Program.’’
On February 26, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testi-
mony on ‘‘INF Withdrawal and the Future of Arms Control: Impli-
cations for the Security of the United States and its Allies.’’
On March 14, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified brief-
ing on space threats.
On March 28, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony
on ‘‘Fiscal Year 2020 Priorities for Department of Defense Nuclear
Activities.’’
On April 3, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
‘‘Fiscal Year 2020 Priorities for National Security Space Programs.’’
On April 9, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
‘‘Fiscal Year 2020 Priorities for Atomic Energy Defense, Non-
proliferation, Safety, and Environmental Management.’’
On May 8, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
‘‘Fiscal Year 2020 Priorities for Missile Defense and Missile Defeat
Programs.’’
On May 15, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified briefing
on ‘‘Space Development Agency and plans to improve resilience and
deterrence in space.’’
On September 20, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified
briefing on the ‘‘Redesigned Kill Vehicle Re-plan.’’
On September 25, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testi-
mony on ‘‘Status of the B61–12 Life Extension and W88 Alter-
ation–370 Programs.’’
On October 30, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified brief-
ing on ‘‘Strategic Forces related to Turkey.’’
On November 19, 2020, the subcommittee received a classified
briefing on Russia and China’s nuclear forces and views on nuclear
deterrence and strategic stability.’’
On January 8, 2020, the subcommittee received a classified brief-
ing on the ‘‘Next Generation Interceptor.’’
On January 20, 2020, the subcommittee met for a classified brief-
ing on the ‘‘Space security study on future space architectures.’’
On February 6, 2020, the subcommittee met for a classified brief-
ing on ‘‘Open Skies Treaty flight execution and future plans.’’
On February 27, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testi-
mony on ‘‘Fiscal Year 2021 Strategic Forces Posture.’’
On March 3, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony on
‘‘FY21 Budget Request for Nuclear Forces and Atomic Energy De-
fense Activities.’’
On March 12, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony
on the ‘‘FY21 Budget Request for Missile Defense and Missile De-
feat Programs.’’
On June 4, 2020, the subcommittee met for a briefing on the
‘‘Next Generation Interceptor.’’
On September 17, 2020, the subcommittee met for a classified
briefing on ‘‘Russian space threats.’’
On November 17, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a classi-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
fied briefing on ‘‘Update from the Department of Defense on Project
Maven.’’
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
97
On December 7 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a classi-
fied briefing update on ‘‘Conventional Prompt Strike Program.’’
On December 9, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a classi-
fied briefing update on ‘‘Chinese Nuclear Weapons Programs.’’
In addition to these events, the subcommittee cancelled hearings
on ‘‘FY2021 Priorities for National Security Space Programs’’ and
‘‘FY2021 Priorities for Atomic Energy Defense, Nonproliferation,
Safety and Environmental Management’’ due to COVID–19 impli-
cations on Committee operations.
Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces
The Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces provided
oversight of the Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force,
and the Office of the Secretary of Defense acquisition programs
providing tactical aircraft and missiles; armor and ground vehicles;
munitions; rotorcraft; individual equipment to include tactical net-
works and radios and personal protective equipment; counter im-
provised explosive device equipment; intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance platforms to include unmanned aerial systems, and
associated support equipment, including National Guard and Re-
serve equipment programs. The Subcommittee on Tactical Air and
Land Forces also provided oversight on policy, such as threats and
force structure requirements, as appropriate within the subcommit-
tee’s jurisdiction. This included current or future acquisition pro-
grams that relate to gaps in the capabilities required to execute
current national military strategies, as well as the allocation of ac-
quisition resources. This also included military-service specific ac-
quisition responsibilities and authorities directly relating to the
subcommittee’s jurisdiction. The subcommittee also participated in
oversight of the management of industrial base concerns during the
COVID–19 pandemic.
The subcommittee conducted three oversight hearings during its
consideration of the fiscal year 2020 budget request, including the
following: April 4, 2019: ‘‘Navy and Marine Corps Tactical Aviation
and Ground Modernization’’; May 1, 2019: ‘‘Fiscal Year 2020 De-
partment of the Army Modernization Programs’’; and May 2, 2019:
‘‘Department of the Air Force Acquisition and Modernization Pro-
grams in the Fiscal Year 2020 National Defense Authorization
President’s Budget Request’’.
Despite the challenges of restrictions to scheduling and in-person
activities due to the COVID–19 pandemic through most of 2020,
the subcommittee conducted two oversight hearings during its con-
sideration of the fiscal year 2021 budget request, including the fol-
lowing: March 5, 2020: ‘‘Fiscal Year 2021 Army and Marine Corps
Ground Systems Modernization Programs’’; and March 10, 2020:
‘‘Department of Defense Tactical and Rotary Aircraft Acquisition
and Modernization Programs in the FY21 President’s Budget Re-
quest’’.
In addition to oversight hearings, the subcommittee held various
briefings and events to conduct oversight, including classified brief-
ings: February 26, 2019: ‘‘Overview of Army Threat Assessment,
Requirements, and Acquisition for Aviation and Combat Vehicles’’;
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
March 6, 2019: ‘‘An Introductory Overview of the U.S. Air Force,
Navy, and Marine Corps Tactical Aviation Acquisition Programs’’;
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
98
March 12, 2019: ‘‘Overview of Marine Corps Threat Assessment,
Requirements, and Acquisition for Aviation and Combat Vehicles’’;
March 26, 2019: Overview of Army and Air Force Intelligence, Sur-
veillance, and Reconnaissance Platforms Capabilities and Alloca-
tion to Support Operations’’; October 29, 2019: ‘‘Update on Army
Soldier Equipment Program’’; November 13, 2019: ‘‘F–35 Program
Update: Sustainment, Production, and Affordability Challenges’’;
November 21, 2019: ‘‘Update on the Air Force’s Next Generation
Air Dominance Family of Systems Concept and Digital Century Se-
ries Initiative’’; December 4, 2019: ‘‘Update on Air Force Intel-
ligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Systems’’; January 14,
2020: ‘‘F–35 Program and Sustainment Update’’; February 12,
2020: ‘‘Update on Joint Critical/Preferred Munitions and Ammuni-
tion Inventory’’; February 28, 2020: ‘‘Department of Defense Elec-
tronic Warfare Update’’; May 29, 2020: ‘‘F–35 Program Update’’;
June 9, 2020: ‘‘Army COVID–19 Update’’; September 22, 2020:
‘‘Modernization of the Conventional Ammunition Production Indus-
trial Base’’; and September 25, 2020: ‘‘United States Marine Corps
Force Design’’.
The subcommittee considered and reported legislation that was
ultimately included in the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116–92). The legislation covered a
range of issues, including authorization of appropriations for pro-
curement programs and research, development, test, and evalua-
tion programs for the Departments of the Army, Navy, Air Force,
and the Reserve Components.
The subcommittee considered and reported legislation that was
ultimately included in William M. (Mac) Thornberry National De-
fense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021. The legislation cov-
ered a range of issues, including authorization of appropriations for
procurement programs and research, development, test, and eval-
uation programs for the Departments of the Army, Navy, Air Force,
and the Reserve Components.
Future of Defense Task Force
The Future of Defense Task Force was created on October 16,
2019, by Chairman Adam Smith and Ranking Member William
‘‘Mac’’ Thornberry. Its mandate was to review emerging threats
and technologies and to evaluate the Department of Defense’s stra-
tegic and budgetary priorities to ensure the United States remains
in long-term strategic overmatch of global competitors.
The following committee members were assigned to the Task
Force: Reps. Seth Moulton and Jim Banks, who served as Co-
Chairs; and Reps. Susan Davis, Scott DesJarlais, Chrissy
Houlahan, Elissa Slotkin, Paul Mitchell, and Michael Waltz.
The Task Force was established in accordance with the Rules of
the House of Representatives, applicable to standing committees,
and the Rules of the Committee on Armed Services. Pursuant to
Rule 5, subsection (b) of the Committee Rules, the Task Force ex-
isted for an initial period of 3 months with a renewal for an addi-
tional 3 months, which the Task Force exercised.
For 6 months, the Task Force conducted briefings, meetings,
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
hearings, virtual roundtables, site visits and CODELS within the
committee’s Rule X jurisdiction. The Task Force received testimony
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
99
from executive branch officials, members of the military services,
and outside experts to include representatives from academia,
think tanks and private industry.
The Task Force ended on April 15, 2020. An extensive report of
the Task Force’s findings and recommendations was submitted to
the chairman and ranking member on Sept. 23, 2020, by the eight
members.
Details of activities included the following:
On October 9, 2019, the Future of Defense Task Force convened
a hearing entitled ‘‘Theories of Victory,’’ which gamed out the fu-
ture of defense for the next 30 to 50 years to determine what suc-
cess should look like. Witnesses were Ms. Michele Flournoy and
Senator Jim Talent.
On February 5, 2020, the Future of Defense Task Force convened
a second hearing entitled ‘‘Supercharging the Innovation Base,’’
which explored ways to ensure private industry and the Depart-
ment of Defense were best prepared to meet emerging threats to
U.S. national security. Witnesses included the Honorable Eric Fan-
ning, Mr. Raj Shah, and Mr. Chris Brose.
A third hearing, ‘‘Battlefield Perspectives,’’ was scheduled for
March 2020, but was postponed then cancelled due to COVID–19
restrictions.
Each Wednesday during session for six months, Task Force mem-
bers received classified briefings on relevant subject matter to in-
clude artificial intelligence, bio security, emerging technologies, and
the innovation base, among others. Briefers included representa-
tives from the Department of Defense, the military services, aca-
demia, and private industry, among others.
The Task Force conducted five CODELS during its review:
The Halifax Security Forum (Halifax, Canada); November 22,
2019–November 24, 2019.
Asia (Vietnam, Cambodia and Thailand); January 17, 2020–Jan-
uary 24, 2020.
The Munich Security Conference (Munich, Germany); February
14–February 15, 2020.
AFRICOM and Africa (Germany, Djibouti, Kenya); February 16–
February 20, 2020.
Silicon Valley and Boston (Palo Alto, Mountain View, San Mateo,
Mountain View and San Francisco, California, and Boston, Massa-
chusetts); February 17, 2020–February 21, 2020.
A sixth CODEL to the North Atlantic Treaty Association head-
quarters and to several Arctic states was cancelled due to COVID–
19 travel restrictions.
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
PUBLICATIONS
HOUSE REPORTS
Report Number Date Filed Bill Number Title
H. Rept. 116–120 .. June 19, 2019 .............. H.R. 2500 ........ National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
H. Rept. 116–120, June 27, 2019 .............. H.R. 2500 ........ National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
Part 2.
H. Rept. 116–442 .. July 9, 2020 ................. H.R. 6395 ........ William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2021
H. Rept. 116–442, July 16, 2020 ............... H.R. 6395 ........ William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authoriza-
Part 2. tion Act for Fiscal Year 2021
COMMITTEE PRINTS
Committee Print No. 1—Rules of the Committee on Armed Serv-
ices, House of Representatives of the United States, 116th Con-
gress, 2019 2020, adopted January 24, 2019.
Committee Print No. 2—Future of Defense Task Force Report
2020.
PUBLISHED PROCEEDINGS
H.A.S.C. No. 116–1—Full Committee Organizational Meeting for
the 116th Congress (01/24/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–2—Full Committee Hearing: Department of
Defense Support to the Southern Border (01/29/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–3—Full Committee Hearing: Evaluation of the
Department of Defense’s Counterterrorism Approach (02/06/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–4—Subcommittee on Military Personnel Hear-
ing: Military Service Academies’ Action Plans to Address the Re-
sults of Sexual Assault and Violence Report at the Military Service
Academies (02/13/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–5—Subcommittee on Readiness and Sub-
committee on Seapower and Projection Forces Joint Hearing: Naval
Surface Forces Readiness: Are Navy Reforms Adequate? (02/26/
2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–6—Subcommittee on Strategic Forces Hearing:
INF Withdrawal and the Future of Arms Control: Implications for
the Security of the United States and its Allies (02/26/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–7—Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerg-
ing Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Department of Defense In-
formation Technology, Cybersecurity, and Information Assurance
(02/26/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–8—Subcommittee on Military Personnel Hear-
ing: Transgender Service in the Military Policy (02/27/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–9—Full Committee Hearing: Outside Perspec-
tives on Nuclear Deterrence Policy and Posture Update (03/06/
2019).
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
(101)
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
102
H.A.S.C. No. 116–10—Full Committee Hearing: National Secu-
rity Challenges and U.S. Military Activities in the Greater Middle
East and Africa (03/07/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–11—Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection
Forces and Subcommittee on Readiness Joint Hearing: U.S. Trans-
portation Command and Maritime Administration: State of the Mo-
bility Enterprise (03/07/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–12—Subcommittee on Military Personnel Hear-
ing: Outside Perspectives on Military Personnel Policy (03/12/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–13—Full Committee Hearing: National Secu-
rity Challenges and U.S. Military Activities in Europe (03/13/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–14—Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerg-
ing Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Re-
quest for U.S. Cyber Command and Operations in Cyberspace (03/
13/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–15—Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: En-
suring Resiliency of Military Installations and Operations in Re-
sponse to Climate Changes (03/13/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–16—Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection
Forces Hearing: Department of the Air Force Fiscal Year 2020
Budget Request for Seapower and Projection Forces (03/14/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–17—Full Committee Hearing: The Fiscal Year
2020 National Defense Authorization Budget Request from the De-
partment of Defense (03/26/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–18—Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection
Forces Hearing: Department of the Navy Fiscal Year 2020 Budget
Request for Seapower and Projection Forces (03/26/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–19—Full Committee Hearing: National Secu-
rity Challenges and U.S. Military Activities in the Indo-Pacific (03/
27/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–20—Subcommittee on Military Personnel Hear-
ing: Reserve Component Duty Status Reform (03/27/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–21—Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerg-
ing Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Re-
quest for Department of Defense Science and Technology Programs:
Maintaining a Robust Ecosystem for Our Technological Edge (03/
28/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–22—Subcommittee on Strategic Forces Hear-
ing: Fiscal Year 2020 Priorities for Department of Defense Nuclear
Activities (03/28/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–23—Full Committee Hearing: The Fiscal Year
2020 National Defense Authorization Budget Request for the De-
partment of Army and the Department of the Air Force (04/02/
2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–24—Subcommittee on Military Personnel Hear-
ing: Examining the Role of the Commander in Sexual Assault Pros-
ecutions (04/02/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–25—Full Committee Hearing: Member Day (04/
03/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–26—Subcommittee on Strategic Forces Hear-
ing: Fiscal Year 2020 Priorities for National Security Space Pro-
grams (04/03/2019).
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
H.A.S.C. No. 116–27—Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerg-
ing Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Reviewing Department of
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
103
Defense Strategy, Policy, and Programs for Countering Weapons of
Mass Destruction for Fiscal Year 2020 (04/03/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–28—Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land
Forces Hearing: Navy and Marine Corps Tactical Aviation and
Ground Modernization (04/04/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–29—Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: Mis-
managed Military Family Housing Programs: What is the Recovery
Plan? (04/04/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–30—Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerg-
ing Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Evolution, Transformation,
and Sustainment: A Review of the Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Re-
quest for U.S. Special Operations Forces and Command (04/09/
2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–31—Subcommittee on Strategic Forces Hear-
ing: Fiscal Year 2020 Priorities for Atomic Energy Defense, Non-
proliferation, Safety and Environmental Management (04/09/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–32—Full Committee Hearing: The Fiscal Year
2020 National Defense Authorization Budget Request for the De-
partment of Navy (04/10/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–33—Subcommittee on Military Personnel Hear-
ing: Feres Doctrine—A Policy in Need of Reform? (04/30/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–34—Full Committee Hearing: National Secu-
rity Challenges and U.S. Military Activity in North and South
America (05/01/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–35—Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land
Forces Hearing: Fiscal Year 2020 Department of the Army Mod-
ernization Programs (05/01/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–36—Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: Fis-
cal Year 2020 Budget Request for Military Construction, Energy,
and Environmental Programs (05/01/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–37—Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land
Forces Hearing: Department of the Air Force Acquisition and Mod-
ernization Programs in the Fiscal Year 2020 National Defense Au-
thorization President’s Budget Request (05/02/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–38—Subcommittee on Strategic Forces Hear-
ing: Fiscal Year 2020 Priorities for Missile Defense and Missile De-
feat Programs (05/08/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–39—Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: Fis-
cal Year 2020 Budget Request for Military Readiness (05/09/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–40—Full Committee Hearing: The Department
of Defense’s Financial Improvement and Audit Remediation Plan:
The Path Forward (05/16/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–41—Subcommittee on Military Personnel Hear-
ing: Military Personnel Management—How Are the Military Serv-
ices Adapting to Recruit, Retain, and Manage High Quality Talent
to Meet the Needs of a Modern Military? (05/16/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–42—Subcommittee on Military Personnel Hear-
ing: Military and Veteran Suicide: Understanding the Problem and
Preparing for the Future (05/21/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–43—Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerg-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
ing Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Securing the Nation’s Inter-
net Architecture (09/10/2019).
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
104
H.A.S.C. No. 116–44—Subcommittee on Military Personnel Hear-
ing: Shattered Families, Shattered Service: Taking Military Domes-
tic Violence Out of the Shadows (09/18/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–45—Subcommittee on Strategic Forces Hear-
ing: Status of the B61–2 Life Extension and W88 Alteration–370
Programs (09/25/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–46—Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerg-
ing Threats and Capabilities and Subcommittee on Readiness Joint
Hearing: Resiliency of Military Installations to Emerging Threats
(10/16/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–47—Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: Ship
and Submarine Maintenance: Cost and Schedule Challenges (10/22/
2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–48—Future of Defense Task Force Hearing:
Theories of Victory (10/29/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–49—Subcommittee on Readiness and Sub-
committee on Tactical Air and Land Forces Joint Hearing: F–35
Program Update: Sustainment, Production, and Affordability Chal-
lenges (11/13/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–50—Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: The
Department of Defense Organic Industrial Base: Challenges, Solu-
tions and Readiness Impacts (11/21/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–51—Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing:
Privatized Housing: Are Conditions Improving for Our Military
Families? (12/05/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–52—Subcommittee on Military Personnel Hear-
ing: Military Health System Reform: A Cure for Efficiency and
Readiness? (12/05/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–53—Subcommittee on Military Personnel Hear-
ing: Diversity in Recruiting and Retention: Increasing Diversity in
the Military—What the Military Services are Doing (12/10/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–54—Full Committee Hearing: U.S. Policy in
Syria and the Broader Region (12/11/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–55—Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerg-
ing Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Climate Change in the Era
of Strategic Competition (12/11/2019).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–56—Full Committee Hearing: DOD’s Role in
Competing with China (01/15/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–57—Full Committee Hearing: Security Update
on the Korean Peninsula (01/28/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–58—Future of Defense Task Force Hearing:
Supercharging the innovation base (02/05/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–59—Subcommittee on Military Personnel Hear-
ing: Exceptional Family Member Program—Are the Military Serv-
ices Really Taking Care of Family Members? (02/05/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–60—Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection
Forces and Subcommittee on Readiness Joint Hearing: Update on
Navy and Marine Corps Readiness in the Pacific in the Aftermath
of Recent Mishaps (02/05/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–61—Full Committee Hearing: The Department
of Defense’s Role in Long-Term Major State Competition (02/11/
2020).
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
H.A.S.C. No. 116–62—Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerg-
ing Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Reviewing Department of
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
105
Defense Strategy, Policy, and Programs for Countering Weapons of
Mass Destruction for Fiscal Year 2021 (02/11/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–63—Subcommittee on Military Personnel Hear-
ing: Alarming Incidents of White Supremacy in the Military—How
to Stop It (02/11/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–64—Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing:
Land Based Ranges: Building Military Readiness While Protecting
Natural and Cultural Resources (02/12/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–65—Full Committee Hearing: The Fiscal Year
2021 National Defense Authorization Budget Request from the De-
partment of Defense (02/26/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–66—Full Committee Hearing: The Fiscal Year
2021 National Defense Authorization Budget Request for the De-
partment of the Navy (02/27/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–67—Subcommittee on Strategic Forces Hear-
ing: Strategic Forces Posture Hearing (02/27/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–68—Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection
Forces Hearing: Air Force Projection Forces Aviation Programs and
Capabilities Related to the 2021 President’s Budget Request (02/27/
2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–69—Full Committee Hearing: The Fiscal Year
2021 National Defense Authorization Budget Request for the De-
partment of the Army (03/03/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–70—Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: Fis-
cal Year 2021 Air Force and Space Force Readiness Posture (03/03/
2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–71—Subcommittee on Strategic Forces Hear-
ing: Fiscal Year 2021 Budget Request for Nuclear Forces and
Atomic Energy Defense Activities (03/03/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–72—Full Committee Hearing: The Fiscal Year
2021 National Defense Authorization Budget Request for the De-
partment of the Air Force (03/04/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–73—Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection
Forces Hearing: Department of the Navy Fiscal Year 2021 Budget
Request for Seapower and Projection Forces (03/04/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–74—Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerg-
ing Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Fiscal Year 2021 Budget Re-
quest for U.S. Cyber Command and Operations in Cyberspace (03/
04/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–75—Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land
Forces Hearing: Fiscal Year 2021 Army and Marine Corps Ground
Systems Modernization Programs (03/05/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–76—Full Committee Hearing: National Secu-
rity Challenges and U.S. Military Activities in the Greater Middle
East and Africa (03/10/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–77—Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land
Forces Hearing: Department of Defense Tactical and Rotary Air-
craft Acquisition and Modernization Programs in the Fiscal Year
2021 President’s Budget Request (03/10/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–78—Full Committee Hearing: National Secu-
rity Challenges and U.S. Military Activity in North and South
America (03/11/2020).
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
H.A.S.C. No. 116–79—Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerg-
ing Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Reviewing Department of
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
106
Defense Science and Technology Strategy, Policy and Programs for
Fiscal Year 2021: Maintaining a Robust Ecosystem for Our Techno-
logical Edge (03/11/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–80—Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection
Forces and Subcommittee on Readiness Joint Hearing: Sealift and
Mobility Requirements in Support of the National Defense Strategy
(03/11/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–81—Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: Fis-
cal Year 2021 Navy and Marine Corps Readiness Posture (03/12/
2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–82—Subcommittee on Strategic Forces Hear-
ing: Fiscal Year 2021 Priorities for Missile Defense and Missile De-
feat Programs (03/12/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–83—Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection
Forces Hearing: Future Force Structure Requirements for the
United States Navy (06/04/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–84—Full Committee Hearing: Department of
Defense COVID–19 Response to Defense Industrial Base Chal-
lenges (06/10/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–85—Subcommittee on Military Personnel Hear-
ing: Racial Disparity in the Military Justice System—How to Fix
the Culture (06/16/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–86—Full Committee Hearing: DOD Authorities
and Roles Related to Civilian Law Enforcement (07/09/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–87—Subcommittee on Military Personnel Hear-
ing: The Military’s #MeToo Moment: An Examination of Sexual
Harassment and Perceived Retaliation in the Department of De-
fense and at Fort Hood (07/29/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–88—Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerg-
ing Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Review of the Recommenda-
tions of the Cyberspace Solarium Commission (07/30/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–89—Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: Ad-
dressing the Legacy of Department of Defense use of PFAS: Pro-
tecting Our Communities and Implementing Reform (09/15/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–90—Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerg-
ing Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Interim Review of the Na-
tional Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence Effort and
Recommendations (09/17/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–91—Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land
Forces Hearing: Modernization of the Conventional Ammunition
Production Industrial Base (09/22/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–92—Full Committee Hearing: The Role of Al-
lies and Partners in U.S. Military Strategy and Operations (09/23/
2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–93—Full Committee Hearing: U.S. Defense
Posture Changes in the European Theater (09/30/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–94—Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerg-
ing Threats and Capabilities Hearing and House Committee on
Foreign Affairs Joint Hearing: Strengthening Biological Security:
Traditional Threats and Emerging Challenges (10/02/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–95—Full Committee Hearing: The U.S. mili-
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
tary mission in Afghanistan and implications of the peace process
on U.S. involvement (11/20/2020).
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
107
H.A.S.C. No. 116–96—Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: Re-
view of the Findings and Recommendations of the National Com-
mission on Military Aviation Safety (12/03/2020).
H.A.S.C. No. 116–97—Subcommittee on Military Personnel Hear-
ing: Fort Hood 2020: The Findings and Recommendations of the
Fort Hood Independent Review Committee (12/09/2020).
PRESS RELEASES
First Session
JANUARY 2019
1/4/19—Smith Statement On Trump Plan To Misuse An Emer-
gency Authority & Divert Money From Military Readiness To Pay
For His Wall
1/16/19—Smith Welcomes Incoming Members Of The House
Armed Services Committee
1/17/19—Smith Statement On Trump Missile Defense Review
1/18/19—Smith & Langevin Slam Trump Administration’s Half-
Baked Climate Change Report
1/18/19—Smith Decries President Trump’s Attack On Congres-
sional Oversight Of Military Issues
1/22/19—Smith Statement On Supreme Court Decision About
Transgender Military Service
1/23/19—Smith Congratulates Congressman Anthony Brown On
Election As Vice Chair Of The Armed Services Committee
1/23/19—Democratic Subcommittee Members For 116th Congress
1/23/19—Smith, Thornberry Release HASC Subcommittee Chairs
And Ranking Members For 116th Congress
1/24/19—Smith Statement On $94 Billion Increase In The Esti-
mated Cost Of Nuclear Weapons Upgrades
1/30/19—Chairman Smith, Senator Warren Introduce Bill Estab-
lishing ‘‘No First Use’’ Policy For Nuclear Weapons Files
1/31/19—Smith Letter To Shanahan Regarding Transparency
With Congress Files
FEBRUARY 2019
2/1/2019—Smith Appoints Vice Chairs Of Armed Services Sub-
committees
2/1/2019—Smith, Cooper Statement On Withdrawal From The
Inf Treaty
2/11/2019—Smith Statement On The Passing Of Walter Jones
2/14/2019—Readiness Subcommittee Holds Military Family
Housing Roundtable
2/15/2019—Smith Statement On President Trump’s Declaration
Of A National Emergency In Order To Take Funds Supporting
Military Families And Military Readiness And Spend Them On His
Wall
2/21/2019—Smith, Engel & Schiff To Trump: Stop Withholding
Information On North Korea From Congress Files
2/25/2019—Chairman Smith And Chairman Yarmuth Denounce
Trump Budget’s Planned Use Of Defense Budget Gimmick: Acting
OMB Director Vought Also Announces Trump Budget Will Call For
Non-Defense Funding Cut
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
2/28/2019—Committee Chairs Question Rationale For Proposed
NSC Climate Change Panel
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00113 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
108
MARCH 2019
3/4/2019—Chairman Smith Denounces Trump’s Acceptance Of
Questionable World Leaders
3/8/2019—Chairman Smith Criticizes Trump’s Cancellation Of
The Requirement To Report Civilian Causalities
3/12/2019—Chairman Smith Statement On DOD Implementation
Of The Ban On Transgender Military Service
3/13/2019—Readiness Subcommittee Holds Hearing On Impacts
Of Climate Change
3/18/2019—Chairman Smith Statement On Release Of List Of
At-Risk Military Construction Projects That Could Be Cut To Fund
Border Wall
3/25/2019—Chairman Smith Statement On Space Force Proposal
3/26/2019—Chairman Smith Statement On DOD Reprogramming
To Fund Border Wall Files
3/27/2019—UPDATED HASC SCHEDULE, APRIL 1–5
APRIL 2019
4/2/2019—HASC Public Schedule, April 8–12
4/2/2019—Update#3 HASC Schedule, April 1–5
4/10/2019—Readiness Subcommittee Chairman Garamendi Leads
Congressional Delegation To Observe Damaged Military Installa-
tions And Privatized Military Housing Units
4/10/2019—HASC Chairman Smith And Ranking Member Thorn-
berry Announce Markup Schedule For Fiscal Year 2020 National
Defense Authorization Act
4/12/2019—Readiness Chairman Garamendi Concludes Congres-
sional Delegation To Study Military Housing And Military Installa-
tions Impacted By Hurricane Florence
4/18/2019—Committee Chair Statement On Redacted Release Of
The Mueller Investigation Report
4/23/2019—HASC Schedule, April 29–May 3
4/29/2019—Updated HASC Schedule, April 29–May 3
4/30/2019—Chairman Smith And Ranking Member Thornberry
Statement On The Passing Of Former Congresswoman Ellen Tau-
scher
4/30/2019—HASC Schedule, May 6–10
MAY 2019
5/1/2019—Readiness Subcommittee Holds Hearing on Depart-
ment of Defense’s FY20 Budget Request for Military Construction,
Energy and Environmental Programs
5/7/2019—HASC SCHEDULE, MAY 13–17
5/8/2019—Chairman Smith Statement on Iranian Conflict and
Potential Escalation in the Region
5/9/2019—Readiness Subcommittee Holds Hearing on FY20
Budget Request for Military Readiness
5/14/2019—HASC SCHEDULE, MAY 20–24
5/15/2019—HASC Democrats Introduce Bill to Limit DOD’s Au-
thority to Reprogram Military Construction Funds
5/16/2019—Smith, Schiff, and Engel Demand Briefing and Docu-
ments on Arms Control, Verification, and Compliance Report
5/22/2019—Smith and Thornberry Slam New DOD Policy to
Stonewall Congressional Oversight
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
5/22/2019—UPDATED: Markup Schedule for Fiscal Year 2020
National Defense Authorization Act
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00114 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
109
5/24/2019—Smith Concerned About Increased Military Presence
in the Middle East
5/27/2019—Smith Statement Honoring Memorial Day
5/29/2019—Tomorrow: NDAA Markup Logistics Press Briefing
5/31/2019—Subcommittee Markup Press Background Briefings
JUNE 2019
6/3/2019—Military Personnel Subcommittee Mark Summary for
H.R. 2500 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
6/3/2019—Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee Mark
Summary for H.R. 2500 National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020
6/3/2019—Strategic Forces Subcommittee Mark Summary for
H.R. 2500 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
6/3/2019—Intelligence and Emerging Threats and Capabilities
Subcommittee Mark Summary for H.R. 2500 National Defense Au-
thorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
6/3/2019—Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee Mark
Summary for H.R. 2500 National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020
6/4/2019—Readiness Subcommittee Mark Summary for H.R.
2500 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
6/5/2019—HASC Subcommittee Marks as Reported for H.R. 2500
The National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2020
6/5/2019—Full Committee Markup Press Background Briefing
6/5/2019—Chairman Smith Response to Trump’s Lies Regarding
Transgender Service Members’ Medical Treatment
6/7/2019—HASC Subcommittee Marks as Reported for H.R. 2500
The National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2020
6/10/2019—Chairman Smith Releases H.R. 2500 The National
Defense Authorization Act for FY 2020
6/12/2019—Chairman Smith Statement on Efforts to Strip Key
Nuclear Provisions from the FY20 NDAA
6/13/2019—Chairman Smith Statement on the Importance of
Passing the FY20 NDAA Without Offsets
6/18/2019—Smith Increasingly Concerned About Heightened
Tensions in the Middle East
6/18/2019—Chairman Smith Statement on Appointment of Mark
Esper to Acting Secretary of Defense
JULY 2019
7/9/2019—Smith Refutes False Claims about the FY20 NDAA
7/12/2019—Democratic Majority Passes Defense Bill Through the
House
7/23/2019—Chairman Smith Statement on Confirmation of Mark
Esper as Secretary of Defense
AUGUST 2019
8/20/19—Chairman Smith Readout of Call With the Indian Am-
bassador to the U.S.
8/30/19—Chairman Smith Statement on Trump Administration’s
Harmful Change in USCIS Policy
SEPTEMBER 2019
9/3/2019—Chairman Smith Statement on Continued Attempts to
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
Fund Border Wall at the Pentagon’s Expense
9/3/2019—HASC SCHEDULE, SEPTEMBER 9–13
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
110
9/9/2019—Chairman Smith Statement on the Retirement of Con-
gresswoman Susan Davis
9/10/2019—Rep. Smith and Sen. Menendez Formally Request
CBO Analyze the Costs of Trump Admin Allowing U.S.-Russia Nu-
clear Treaty to Expire
9/11/2019—HASC SCHEDULE, SEPTEMBER 16–20
9/17/2019—HASC SCHEDULE, SEPTEMBER 23–27
9/18/2019—Defense Bill Goes to Conference and House Leader-
ship Announces Conferees
9/18/2019—NDAA Conferees to Meet
9/26/2019—Smith Warns Against Ratcheting up Tension in the
Middle East by Deploying Additional Military Personnel and Assets
9/30/2019—Chairman Smith Statement on the Retirement of
Ranking Member Thornberry
OCTOBER 2019
10/7/2019—Smith Slams Shift in U.S. Policy in Syria, Warns of
Implications
10/8/2019—Top National Security Democrats Warn Trump
Admin Against U.S. Withdrawal from Key Euro-Atlantic Security
Treaty
10/9/2019—HASC Schedule, October 14–18
10/10/2019—Smith Statement Following Visit to Border Wall
Construction Site
10/11/2019—Smith Warns Against Aiding Saudi Arabia After
Abandoning Kurdish Partners
10/15/2019—HASC Schedule, October 21–25
10/17/2019—Smith Statement on the Passing of Congressman
Elijah Cummings
10/17/2019—Chairmen Smith and Engel Statement on the Re-
tirement of Rose Gottemoeller, Deputy Secretary General of NATO
10/18/2019—House Armed Services Committee Stands Up Future
of Defense Task Force
10/22/2019—HASC Schedule: October 28–November 1
10/24/2019—Smith Slams Decision to Abandon the Kurds
10/24/2019—Smith Blames Border Wall as Main Sticking Point
in FY20 NDAA Negotiations
10/27/2019—Smith Statement on Al-Baghdadi Special Operation
NOVEMBER 2019
11/6/2019—HASC Schedule: November 11–15
11/15/2019—UPDATED HASC Schedule: November 18–22
11/22/2019—Chairmen Smith and Engel Demand Answers on
White House Scheme on Open Skies Treaty
11/25/2019—Chairman Smith Condemns President Trump’s In-
terference in the Military Justice Process
11/27/2019—HASC Schedule: December 2–6
DECEMBER 2019
12/3/2019—HASC Schedule: December 9–13
12/3/2019—Chairmen Smith and Engel Demand Answers on Ad-
ministration’s Negotiations with Asian Allies
12/9/2019—House and Senate Armed Services Committees Com-
plete Conference for the FY20 National Defense Authorization Act
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
12/11/2019—Chairman Smith Corrects the Record on the FY20
NDAA
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00116 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
111
12/11/2019—Chairman Smith on the Passage of the FY20 NDAA
Conference Report
12/20/2019—Chairman Smith Statement as the FY20 NDAA is
Signed into Law
12/29/2019—Smith Slams Recent Rocket Attacks in Iraq Killing
U.S. Contractor
Second Session
JANUARY 2020
1/3/2020—Smith Raises Grave Concerns About Pentagon Military
Action in Iraq
1/8/2020—HASC Schedule: January 13–17
1/15/2020—Smith Statement on Future Plans to Steal Depart-
ment of Defense Funds to pay for a Border Wall
1/21/2020—HASC Schedule: January 27–31
1/28/2020—Smith and Thornberry Joint Statement on U.K.’s 5G
Decision
1/29/2020—HASC Schedule: February 3–7
FEBRUARY 2020
2/3/2020—UPDATED HASC Schedule: February 3–7
2/4/2020—HASC Schedule: February 10–14
2/4/2020—Smith Criticizes the Administration’s Deployment of
W76 2 Low-Yield Nuclear Warheads
2/5/2020—UPDATED HASC Schedule: February 10–14
2/8/2020—Smith Denounces the Removal of Lieutenant Colonel
Alexander S. Vindman
2/13/2020—Smith Condemns Waste of DoD Funds on the Border
Wall
2/19/2020—HASC Schedule: February 24–28
2/21/2020—UPDATED HASC Schedule: February 24–28
2/26/2020—HASC Schedule: March 2–6
2/27/2020—UPDATED HASC Schedule: March 2–6
2/28/2020—Smith, Thornberry, Garamendi and Lamborn Urge
DOD to Expand Tenant Bill of Rights as Required by Law
2/29/2020—Smith Statement on Conditions-Based Peace Agree-
ment in Afghanistan
MARCH 2020
3/4/2020—HASC Schedule: March 9–13
3/9/2020—UPDATED HASC Schedule: March 9–13
3/13/2020—Smith Statement on the PFAS Task Force March
Progress Report
3/26/2020—Smith & Engel Lead Effort Pushing Trump Adminis-
tration to Maintain Humanitarian Assistance to Yemen During
Coronavirus Crisis
3/27/2020—Smith, Thornberry Introduce ‘‘By Request’’ Bill and
Begin FY21 National Defense Authorization Act Process
3/30/2020—Smith Statement on Continued COVID Precautions
and the FY21 NDAA
APRIL 2020
4/1/2020—House Committee Chairs Request Extension of Public
Comment Periods During Coronavirus National Emergency
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
4/2/2020—HASC Leadership Joint Statement on the Dismissal of
U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt Captain
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00117 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
112
4/6/2020—Smith Calls for Modly’s Removal After Mishandling
U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt COVID–19 Outbreak
4/7/2020—Smith, Engel, Reed, & Menendez Statement on Open
Skies Treaty
4/7/2020—Smith Statement on Resignation of Acting Secretary of
the Navy Modly
4/9/2020—Smith, Pallone, & Thompson Urge President Trump to
Coordinate Production and Acquisition of COVID–19 Response
Supplies
4/14/2020—Smith Statement on One-Year Anniversary of
Trump’s Discriminatory Transgender Ban
4/15/2020—Leading National Security Democrats Raise Alarm
over Trump Admin’s Dispute With South Korea Over Cost-Sharing
Deal
4/17/2020—Smith Statement on DOD Inspector General’s JEDI
Findings
4/17/2020—Smith Slams High-Risk Ligado Request
4/24/2020—Smith Statement on the Navy’s Investigation of the
COVID–19 Outbreak Aboard the U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt
4/28/2020—Smith Slams Trump Administration’s Continued
Theft of DoD Funding
4/28/2020—Smith, Thornberry Statement on FY21 NDAA Proc-
ess
4/29/2020—Smith Statement on the Navy’s Additional Investiga-
tion of the COVID–19 Outbreak Aboard the U.S.S. Theodore Roo-
sevelt
MAY 2020
5/8/2020—Smith, Thornberry, and 20 Bipartisan Members De-
mand Answers From FCC
5/15/2020—Smith, Thornberry Sign Bipartisan, Bicameral Letter
to Administration in Support of MFO in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula
5/18/2020—Smith Statement on Navy’s First Transgender Serv-
ice Waiver
5/21/2020—Smith, Cooper Statement on Trump Administration’s
Withdrawal From the Open Skies Treaty
5/22/2020—Smith & Engel Denounce Trump Administration’s Il-
legal Withdrawal from Open Skies Treaty
5/22/2020—Smith and 20 Armed Services Democrats Slam
Trump Administration’s Open Skies Treaty Withdrawal
5/22/2020—Smith, Speier Call on President Trump to Extend Na-
tional Guard Activation to Combat COVID–19
5/29/2020—HASC Schedule: June 1–5
JUNE 2020
6/1/2020—Smith Statement on Trump’s Intent to Invoke the In-
surrection Act
6/2/2020—Smith Demands Answers on the Apparent Militariza-
tion of America
6/3/2020—Smith, Nadler, Grijalva, and Thompson Call for An-
swers on Trump Administrations Use of Force Against Peaceful DC
Protestors
6/3/2020—Smith Calls on Secretary of Defense and Chairman of
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
the Joint Chiefs to Explain Military Activity in Washington, D.C.
6/4/2020—HASC Schedule: June 8–12
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00118 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
113
6/5/2020—Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Thornberry
Announce Markup Schedule for Fiscal Year 2021 National Defense
Authorization Act
6/5/2020—Smith and 30 HASC Democrats Call for Accountability
from Military Leadership on Behalf of the American People
6/8/2020—Smith, Lowey, Cooper, Kaptur and Visclosky Call for
Answers on Trump Administration’s Proposal to Resume Nuclear
Testing
6/10/2020—Smith Demands Responses to Essential Oversight
Questions
6/11/2020—HASC Schedule: June 15–19
6/12/2020—Subcommittee Markup Press Background Briefings
6/17/2020—HASC to Distribute NDAA Amendments
6/19/2020—Smith Statement on Navy’s Completion of U.S.S.
Theodore Roosevelt COVID–19 Investigation
6/21/2020—Intelligence and Emerging Threats and Capabilities
Subcommittee Mark Summary for H.R. 6395 National Defense Au-
thorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021
6/21/2020—Strategic Forces Subcommittee Mark Summary for
H.R. 6395 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021
6/22/2020—Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee Mark
Summary for H.R. 6395 National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2021
6/22/2020—Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee Mark
Summary for H.R. 6395 National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2021
6/22/2020—Readiness Subcommittee Mark Summary for H.R.
6395 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021
6/22/2020—Military Personnel Subcommittee Mark Summary for
H.R. 6395 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021
6/24/2020—Full Committee Markup Press Background Briefing
6/24/2020—HASC Subcommittee Marks as Reported for H.R.
6395 The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021
6/25/2020—Chairman Smith Releases Summary of H.R. 6395
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021
6/27/2020—Chairman Smith Releases H.R. 6395 The National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021
6/29/2020—Smith Statement on Russia’s Reported Bounties on
American Soldiers
6/30/2020—HASC Schedule: July 6–10
JULY 2020
7/6/2020—Smith, Khanna Statement in Support of UN Envoy
Martin Griffiths Peace Efforts in Yemen
7/14/2020—Smith, Waters, Engel, Thompson and Pallone Seek
Information on Trump Administration Failures to Boost Production
of PPE and Testing As COVID–19 Cases Spike
7/14/2020—Smith and Thornberry Joint Statement on the U.K.’s
Decision to Protect Their Telecom Networks From Huawei
7/17/2020—Smith Statement on DOD’s Ban on the Public Dis-
play of the Confederate Flag
7/20/2020—Smith, Thompson, Nadler Joint Statement on Trump
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
Administration’s Action in Portland
7/20/2020—Annual Defense Bill Comes to the Floor
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
114
7/21/2020—Democratic-Led House Passes Annual Defense Bill
for the 60th Consecutive Year
7/22/2020—HASC Schedule: July 27–31
7/28/2020—Smith Statement on DoD Line Items in the Senate
Republican’s COVID Supplemental Bill
7/29/2020—Smith Statement on Proposed Troop Reposition and
Drawdown in Germany
AUGUST 2020
8/2/2020—Smith Statement on Anthony Tata’s Senate Confirma-
tion Failure
8/11/2020—Smith and Reed Statement on Title 32 Authorities for
State Response to COVID–19
8/14/2020—Committee Chairs Smith and DeFazio Lead 68 Mem-
bers of Congress in Pressing President Trump on National Guard
and FEMA Cost-Sharing Requirements
8/15/2020—Smith Statement on Israel and United Arab Emirates
Agreement
8/17/2020—Smith and Thornberry Statement on Prospect of a
Presidential Pardon for Edward Snowden
8/26/2020—Smith and Menendez Statement on the Immense
Costs of Allowing the New START Treaty to Expire
8/26/2020—Armed Services, Oversight, and Intelligence Commit-
tees Urge DOD IG Review Retaliation Against Lieutenant Colonels
Alexander and Yevgeny Vindman
SEPTEMBER 2020
9/5/2020—Chairman Smith Statement on Trump’s Lack of Re-
spect for the Military
9/8/2020—Armed Services and Oversight Subcommittees Open
Investigation Into Recent Service Member Deaths at Fort Hood
9/8/2020—HASC Schedule: September 14–18
9/15/2020—Smith Statement on Israel, United Arab Emirates,
and Bahrain Normalization Agreement
9/16/2020—HASC Schedule: September 21–25
9/17/2020—Thornberry Portrait to Hang in HASC Hearing Room
9/22/2020—Smith Statement on Defense Department Misuse of
CARES Act COVID Relief Funds
9/24/2020—TOMORROW: Future of Defense Task Force Unveils
Final Report at the Brookings Institution
9/24/2020—HASC Schedule: September 28–October 2
9/29/2020—Future of Defense Task Force Releases Final Report
OCTOBER 2020
10/6/2020—Smith Statement on the Military Leadership Quar-
antine for COVID
10/9/2020—Top National Security Democrats to Esper: Commit
to Current U.S. Troop Levels on Korean Peninsula
10/23/2020—Smith Condemns Executive Order Establishing
Schedule F Appointments
NOVEMBER 2020
11/9/2020—Smith Condemns Dismissal of Secretary of Defense
Esper Ahead of Presidential Transition
11/10/2020—Smith Warns Gutting Pentagon During Transition
Could be Devastating for National Security
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
11/12/2020—HASC Schedule: November 16–20
11/17/2020—Smith Statement on Afghanistan Troop Drawdown
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00120 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
115
11/18/2020—Armed Services Committees Advance Fiscal Year
2021 Conference Process at Annual ‘Pass the Gavel’ Meeting
11/18/2020—House Leadership Announces FY21 NDAA Con-
ferees
11/23/2020—Smith Statement on Withdrawal from Open Skies
Treaty
11/24/2020—Smith Statement on the Air Force’s Seemingly Polit-
ical C 130J Basing Decision
11/25/2020—House Chairs Seek Accounting of Political Ap-
pointees Burrowing into Career Positions at Dozens of Agencies
11/25/2020—HASC Schedule: November 30–December 4
DECEMBER 2020
12/2/2020—HASC Schedule: December 7–11
12/2/2020—Smith and Thornberry Statement on FY21 NDAA
12/3/2020—Smith Statement on Findings and Recommendations
from the National Commission on Military Aviation Safety
12/3/2020—Smith Commends Rep. Rogers on Selection as Rank-
ing Member
12/3/2020—Readiness Chairman Garamendi and Ranking Mem-
ber Lamborn Issue Statement on Briefing to Address Concerning
Rise in Military Aviation Accidents
12/8/20—Smith Statement on the Passage of the FY21 NDAA
Conference Report
12/8/20—Smith Statement on Secretary of Defense Nomination
12/18/20—Smith and Langevin Statement on Armed Services
Committee’s Commitment to Cybersecurity
12/19/20—Smith Warns Pentagon Leadership Against Severing
Dual-Hat Relationship Between the National Security Agency and
U.S. Cyber Command
12/21/20—Smith, Maloney and Labor Leaders Urge President
Trump to Sign FY21 National Defense Authorization Act into Law
Æ
SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with REPORTS
VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Feb 18, 2021 Jkt 042828 PO 00000 Frm 00121 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6611 E:\HR\OC\HR709.XXX HR709
File and source
- File
- CRPT_crpt-116hrpt709_crpt-116hrpt709.pdf
- Size
- 782,426 bytes
- SHA-256
- b33bef3419f8f05e50f61a4e9a0604edc659c6445cbf195559d265bd54335433
- Original
- www.govinfo.gov