    [House Hearing, 115 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                             [H.A.S.C. No. 115-73]

                                    HEARING

                                       ON

                       NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT

                              FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019

                                      AND

                  OVERSIGHT OF PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED PROGRAMS

                                   BEFORE THE

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                         ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

           SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGING THREATS AND CAPABILITIES HEARING

                                       ON

                         EVOLUTION, TRANSFORMATION, AND

                           SUSTAINMENT: A REVIEW AND

                       ASSESSMENT OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2019

                        BUDGET REQUEST FOR U.S. SPECIAL

                         OPERATIONS FORCES AND COMMAND

                                   __________

                                  HEARING HELD
                               FEBRUARY 15, 2018

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                    ______

                         U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    28-996                    WASHINGTON : 2018

               SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGING THREATS AND CAPABILITIES

                    ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York, Chairwoman

    BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania           JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island
    BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio               RICK LARSEN, Washington
    RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana         JIM COOPER, Tennessee
    LIZ CHENEY, Wyoming, Vice Chair      JACKIE SPEIER, California
    JOE WILSON, South Carolina           MARC A. VEASEY, Texas
    FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey        TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
    DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado               BETO O'ROURKE, Texas
    AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia                STEPHANIE N. MURPHY, Florida
    JODY B. HICE, Georgia
                    Pete Villano, Professional Staff Member
                  Lindsay Kavanaugh, Professional Staff Member
                              Neve Schadler, Clerk

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

                  STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

    Langevin, Hon. James R., a Representative from Rhode Island,
      Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and
      Capabilities...................................................     2
    Stefanik, Hon. Elise M., a Representative from New York,
      Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities..     1

                                   WITNESSES

    Thomas, GEN Raymond A., USA, Commander, U.S. Special Operations
      Command........................................................     6
    West, Owen, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special
      Operations/Low-Intensity Conflict, U.S. Department of Defense..     4

                                    APPENDIX

    Prepared Statements:

        Stefanik, Hon. Elise M.......................................    25
        Thomas, GEN Raymond A........................................    39
        West, Owen...................................................    27

    Documents Submitted for the Record:

        [There were no Documents submitted.]

    Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:

        Mr. Hice.....................................................    65
        Ms. Stefanik.................................................    65

    Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:

        Mr. Lamborn..................................................    71
        Ms. Speier...................................................    69
        Mr. Wilson...................................................    70

                  EVOLUTION, TRANSFORMATION, AND SUSTAINMENT:
                A REVIEW AND ASSESSMENT OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2019
         BUDGET REQUEST FOR U.S. SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES AND COMMAND

                                  ----------

                      House of Representatives,
                           Committee on Armed Services,
             Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities,
                           Washington, DC, Thursday, February 15, 2018.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:03 p.m., in
    room 2212, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Elise M.
    Stefanik (chairwoman of the subcommittee) presiding.

     OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ELISE M. STEFANIK, A REPRESENTATIVE
    FROM NEW YORK, CHAIRWOMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGING THREATS AND
                              CAPABILITIES

        Ms. Stefanik. The subcommittee will come to order. I am
    pleased to welcome everyone to this important hearing entitled,
    ``Evolution, Transformation, and Sustainment: A Review of the
    Fiscal Year 2019 Budget Request for U.S. Special Operations
    Forces and Command.'' The fiscal year 2019 budget request for
    U.S. Special Operations Command [SOCOM] totals more than $13.6
    billion, an approximate 10 percent increase, and the largest
    request ever submitted. It also seeks additional personnel
    authorizations, putting the total size of the force above
    71,000, the largest ever envisioned. While I am pleased to see
    continued fiscal support for special operations forces [SOF],
    it is deeply troubling to see continued dependency on overseas
    continued [contingency] operations funding [OCO]. This problem
    is most acute in the operations and maintenance accounts, where
    OCO is an alarming 33 percent.
        One year ago, before this very committee, General Thomas
    wisely noted that such dependency has created a force that is,
    quote, ``largely a facade,'' unquote. Unfortunately, we find
    ourselves in the same place today, if not worse. Working
    together, we must commit to remedy this imbalance. And I look
    forward to talking about concrete ways in which this committee
    can help, while you continue to help yourselves. This 10
    percent budget increase also reminds us that we must work to
    ensure we are not choosing quantity over quality, and that
    special operations forces remain balanced across the entirety
    of the joint operating force and the military services, who
    are, themselves, experiencing near existential readiness
    crises.
        The recently released National Defense Strategy [NDS]
    indeed places special operations forces central to efforts
    across the full spectrum of non-state and state threats. Rising
    and asymmetric challenges posed by Russia and China and the
    potential for contingencies on the Korean Peninsula impair our
    ongoing efforts in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and
    Somalia. All this while SOF also maintains a presence in some
    80 additional countries today. Now, more than ever, we run the
    risk of overextending our SOF forces, who are central to our
    national defense.
        Of particular concern, we see the fight in Syria changing.
    More and more, our forces are engaging Russian and Syrian
    regime proxies, as most recently seen in the aggressive
    fighting in Deir al-Zour. The defeat of ISIS [Islamic State of
    Iraq and Syria] now reveals the fingerprints of the larger
    geopolitical fight we are engaged in, putting at risk current
    authorities, frameworks, and partnerships, and not to mention
    the considerable risk to our forces on the ground in an already
    clouded and fractured battlefield.
        I look forward to hearing from both of our witnesses today
    how our special operations forces are postured to support the
    new National Defense Strategy, while also continuing forward as
    the main line of effort in our current efforts across the
    globe.
        A large part of this subcommittee charge is looking far
    ahead to consider what's next. In doing so, I see many
    challenges, but also great opportunities in emerging
    technologies such as AI [artificial intelligence], quantum
    computing, nanotechnology, synthetic biology, the Internet of
    Things, and many others that will provide a significant
    battlefield advantage for special operations forces and the
    broader joint force. We must ensure that we are doing
    everything we can to push the technological edge and maintain a
    battlefield advantage. Rest assured, our near-peer adversaries
    are already aggressively exploring these technologies, which
    present both economic and national security challenges for our
    Nation. To this end, I am somewhat disappointed that SOCOM's
    budget request decreases research and development [R&D] funding
    for a second year in a row. I look forward to hearing the
    rationale for this, and taking any necessary steps to ensure we
    do not lose our technological and battlefield advantages.
        Needless to say, there is a lot of ground to cover today. I
    would like to welcome both of our witnesses, Mr. Owen West, the
    Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-
    Intensity Conflict [SO/LIC], and General Tony Thomas, Commander
    of U.S. Special Operations Command. Since this is Mr. West's
    first appearance before the House Armed Services Committee, let
    me congratulate you on your confirmation as Assistant Secretary
    of Defense for Special Operations, and we look forward to
    working with you. I would also like now to recognize my friend
    and the ranking member, Jim Langevin, from Rhode Island, for
    any opening comments he would like to make.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Stefanik can be found in the
    Appendix on page 25.]

      STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES R. LANGEVIN, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
    RHODE ISLAND, RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGING THREATS
                            AND CAPABILITIES

        Mr. Langevin. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you,
    Secretary West. I want to welcome you before the committee. And
    General Thomas, I want to thank you both for appearing before
    us today and for your service to our Nation. It is great to
    have you back, General. Last year in my opening statement on
    the U.S. Special Operations Command budget request, I
    highlighted the ever-increasing demand for reliance on special
    operations forces by combatant commanders, as the chair has
    also referenced in her opening statement. Today, that demand
    and reliance has not decreased. In fact, under the new National
    Defense Strategy it will likely increase with the focus on
    inter-state competition with gray zone conflicts below the
    level of armed conflict. Our special operators have a myriad of
    critical skill sets that can be employed across the full
    spectrum of conflict, yet we must be prudent about how the
    force is employed, or we risk breaking the tip of the spear.
    After 17 years, the global counterterrorism fight is by no
    means over. At the same time, we must be prepared for future
    activities and conflicts in which potential adversaries have
    made gains in technologies like robotics and biotechnology, and
    have new capabilities aimed at achieving information dominance.
        The fiscal year 2019 budget request for USSOCOM is $13.6
    billion, just 2 percent of the overall Department of Defense
    [DOD] request. Reflected in the request are more robust
    investments for enhancing SOF operations throughout the
    information environment, including enhanced cyber and network
    resiliency capabilities. As a result of section 1637 of the
    National Defense Authorization Act [NDAA] for FY [fiscal year]
    2018, the Secretary of Defense has directed USSOCOM to
    establish a centralized capability for military information
    support operations, global messaging, and counter-messaging.
    The FY 2019 request includes $18 million to that end.
        This hearing provides us with an opportunity to understand
    how USSOCOM will fulfill its roles and responsibilities under
    section 1637 to better enable an enhanced approach to maximize
    effects from the tactical to strategic levels, while
    contributing to a whole-of-government effort. As in years past,
    much of the USSOCOM funding request, particularly in the
    operations and maintenance accounts, remains part of the
    overseas contingency operations. However, many of these
    activities and programs are enduring, which means their
    classification remains a serious concern for me. Baseline
    funding is crucial to provide USSOCOM stability for programming
    and, reflected properly, it would enable us to better
    understand defense spending in the current and the out-years.
        In addition to a dialogue about the demands on our force,
    readiness for current and future contingencies, and associated
    resource requests, there are several legislative and policy
    issues at hand to discuss. This includes implementation of
    section 922 of the NDAA regarding the role and responsibilities
    of your office, Secretary West. And I look forward to hearing
    your vision and efforts for implementing reforms intended to
    empower your position to effectively conduct internal oversight
    and advocacy.
        SOF are engaged in operational activities globally under
    legislative authorities carefully overseen by the committee.
    Section 1209 of the FY 2015 NDAA authorizes the Department to
    provide assistance to vetted Syrian opposition forces. SOF
    continue to advise and assist in the fight against ISIL
    [Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant] in Syria, where we have
    seen remarkable progress. A transition to stability operations
    has begun in many areas. So with 1209 set to expire on December
    31, 2018, I would like to ask our witnesses their perspective
    on an extension of that authority, and how would continued
    training and assistance be scoped if, in fact, an extension is
    granted? In closing, I, again, want to thank our witnesses for
    being here today, and express my gratitude to the men and women
    of our Armed Forces around the globe. I know you have
    extraordinary responsibilities and burdens on your shoulders.
    The Nation is grateful for the work that you do and for your
    service. With that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
        Ms. Stefanik. Thank you, Jim. And I want to take this
    moment to remind our members that immediately following the
    open hearing, the committee will reconvene right next door in
    2216 for a closed, classified roundtable discussion with both
    of our witnesses. Before we begin, I also want to remind our
    witnesses that your full written statements will be submitted
    for the record. And we ask that you summarize those statements
    in 5 minutes or less for your opening statements. Secretary
    West, we will begin with you, and I look forward to your
    opening statement.

      STATEMENT OF OWEN WEST, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR
     SPECIAL OPERATIONS/LOW-INTENSITY CONFLICT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
                                DEFENSE

        Secretary West. Thank you, Chairwoman. Chairwoman, Ranking
    Member, and distinguished members of this committee, I am
    honored to appear before you as the Assistant Secretary of
    Defense of Special Operations/Low-Intensity Conflict. In my
    short time on the job, I have been most impressed by the level
    of commitment demonstrated by my staff and their U.S. Special
    Operations Command teammates. There exists a relentless but
    thoughtful focus on warfighting, which is unsurprising in an
    enterprise led by Secretary Mattis. I am pleased to share this
    opportunity with one such warfighter. From 2001 to 2013,
    General Tony Thomas deployed every year to combat. He is a
    reflection of the force he leads, from his deployment cycle to
    the intellectual creativity and competitive drive he shares
    with his fellow operators.
        I mentioned competitiveness because we have a new National
    Defense Strategy that clarifies my priorities, none bigger than
    helping General Thomas steadily build competitive advantage
    across the vast spectrum of warfare special operations calls
    home. The NDS calls for a new era, where we compete in what
    Secretary Mattis calls the contact layer, the daily clash of
    national will that occurs short of armed conflict, where your
    special operations forces are today building relationships and
    reducing the enemy. The task is to remain unpredictable but
    expansive, pushing the competitive boundaries in ways our
    enemies do not expect. To sustain this expansion, we must be
    fiscally hawkish, reducing asymmetry by adopting a focus on
    return on investment.
        Overhead costs increase as you move from tooth to tail. In
    business, we call this upstream inflation. For example,
    $500,000 in Washington, DC, can buy you a think-tank report,
    whereas $500,000 deployed in the field with a captain as a
    chief investment officer can be leveraged into a force of
    highly trained indigenous allies.
        Secretary Mattis' business reform efforts seek to make the
    force more lethal, and resource allocation that prioritizes the
    operating forces is the next logical step. The 127 Echo program
    is an example of best practices investing. I would like to
    thank Congress for continuing to support 127e, which has grown
    from a pilot program to a $100 million lever that has had a
    direct impact in steadily clawing back territory lost to ISIS
    to name a single impact point.
        Likewise, section 1202 is an example of Congress' forward-
    leaning investment to counter unconventional threats. I see
    these authorities as part of Congress' strong and continued
    investment in SOF. My commitment to you is to focus on returns.
    USSOCOM amounts to roughly 1.9 percent of the DOD budget, which
    enables a global presence in 90 countries. This capital
    expenditure fuels the current fight, but it must also result in
    long-term competitive advantage.
        The most important capital investment is human. Everyone on
    this committee is well aware of the demand inelasticity for
    SOF. We simply lack the supply to satisfy all customers.
    General Thomas has already taken the first step in sustainment
    by addressing dwell time, and a second step by conducting a
    comprehensive prioritization review. That leaves mission set.
        As Secretary Mattis indicated in late December, our
    conventional force is capable right now of assuming some of
    these missions. I say that leaves mission set because our other
    option is growing the force. Our 2019 budget request does
    include modest end strength increases for SOF across each of
    the services, but the growth rate has slowed precipitously. SOF
    cannot be quickly grown. Today, we face a natural resource that
    is fully tapped by traditional service recruiting. Only 30
    percent of high schoolers are qualified for military service.
    We must, therefore, explore unconventional techniques and new
    pools to recruit men and women who have the right stuff.
        Today's battlefield has challenged the traditional
    definition of a combatant. Successfully operating in the global
    contact layer demands that we build a diverse force. The SOF
    entry standards are high, but America has always encouraged its
    pioneers. We need more candidates without military histories,
    we need more cultural diversity, we need more women.
        SOF tryouts are life-altering experiences. The reward is
    joining an elite team, where the commitment to each other is as
    strong as the commitment to country. That human element is the
    key element in SOCOM. General Thomas runs a global risk-reward
    venture, and human failure is inevitable. When mistakes are
    made, one of my principal responsibilities is to ensure
    transparency and provide you the necessary and appropriate
    information. We owe it to the families, the Department [of
    Defense], Congress, and the American people to complete
    investigations with thoroughness, diligence, and timeliness.
        We will take all steps necessary to protect our greatest
    asset, those men and women who have volunteered several times
    over to earn the title of special operators. Their fervent
    defense of our beloved Nation makes us all proud. I will never
    lose sight of that.
        I want to end on section 922. I view Congress as a natural
    partner. During my confirmation hearing, I promised to remain
    close to Congress because of that natural partnership. There
    should be no surprises. The Department is reviewing the
    implementation of 922. General Thomas and I are partners in
    this effort. We will move together to implement it. Our goal is
    to make SOCOM a more efficient enterprise that supports the
    National Defense Strategy and the Secretary of Defense. Thank
    you, and I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Secretary West can be found in
    the Appendix on page 27.]
        Ms. Stefanik. Thank you, Secretary West. General Thomas.

       STATEMENT OF GEN RAYMOND A. THOMAS, USA, COMMANDER, U.S.
                       SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND

        General Thomas. Chairwoman Stefanik, Representative
    Langevin, and distinguished members of the committee, I am
    honored to appear before you to provide an update on the
    posture of United States Special Operations Command and our
    superb special operations forces. I am pleased to share the
    table with our new Assistant Secretary for Special Operations,
    Owen West. Working closely with Secretary West, we are
    embracing section 922 as the natural evolution of SOCOM's
    service-like responsibilities that Congress envisioned when you
    created us 31 years ago.
        Let me summarize the posture of SOCOM and your special
    operations forces. We continue to have outsized effects around
    the globe, defeating our enemies, training, equipping, and
    enabling our friends and allies, rapidly transforming the
    organization to be prepared for all future threats, and caring
    for our fallen, wounded, and ill, and their families. Your
    special operations forces are doing phenomenal work. Since I
    last appeared before this committee, SOCOM's primary focus has
    continued to be on the defeat of ISIS and al-Qaida and their
    affiliates. Special operations forces played an integral role
    as part of the joint force in the destruction of ISIS's
    physical caliphate in Syria and Iraq.
        In coordination with allied and host nation partners,
    special operations forces continue to confront ISIS and al-
    Qaida wherever they sought sanctuary: in Afghanistan, Yemen,
    Libya, Somalia, the trans-Sahel, Lake Chad basin, the Maghreb,
    and even as far off as the Philippines. In addition to our
    historic efforts to confront violent extremism, SOCOM continues
    to enhance our role as part of the joint force in assuring
    allies and improving their capabilities in the face of
    aggressive regional hegemons, reinforcing host nation and law
    enforcement efforts in the Western Hemisphere in defense of our
    national boundaries, and preparing for contingency operations.
        Our successes are directly attributable to recruiting and
    training amazing Americans, outfitting them with the best
    equipment and training in the world, and empowering them with
    the requisite authorities to defeat our adversaries. Our people
    continue to be the decisive advantage. Congress' support
    continues to be key in our efforts in the form of necessary
    resources and specific authorities. With title 10, section 127
    Echo, Congress allowed special operations forces to support
    vetted foreign forces against terrorist groups. It is a
    powerful authority directly responsible for neutralizing
    hundreds of enemy leaders and fighters.
        Section 1209 of the 2015 NDAA allowed special operations
    forces to train and equip a 50,000-plus person force of vetted,
    Kurdish, and Arab Syrians to remove ISIS from 98 percent of the
    territory they once held in Syria. 1209 played a decisive role
    in the military defeat of ISIS's physical caliphate.
        In this year's NDAA, you provided us section 1202, an
    authority special operations forces will employ to support
    friends and dissuade aggression by strategic competitors. We
    think it will provide us a distinct operational advantage, and
    thank you for this important irregular warfare authority.
    Congress has continued to provide us with all the resourcing we
    need to do our job. As you two mentioned in your preamble and
    Secretary West mentioned in his, in fiscal year 2017, our
    budget was $11.8 billion. Our projected budget for fiscal year
    2018 is $12.3 billion; and fiscal year 2019 is projected to be
    $13.6 billion. At 1.9 percent of the total DOD budget, with
    roughly matching sister service contributions, special
    operations forces provide unique and highly effective
    capabilities and extraordinary return on investment across the
    full spectrum of conflict.
        Defeating our enemies, defending the homeland, deterring
    adversaries, supporting allies, and fostering innovation, SOCOM
    operates at a fast, but manageable pace.
        Since I last appeared, SOCOM service components effectively
    reduced the deployment tempo of our personnel, with the
    majority under the Secretary of Defense-directed deployment-to-
    dwell ratio of 1:2. Our people and our formations are better
    than they have ever been, thriving under pressure, executing
    the toughest missions, and achieving success.
        Success, however, has carried a high price. In the past 10
    months, we suffered the loss of 20 special operations personnel
    from our formation in combat, with 144 wounded and injured. I
    will close recounting the words of one of our Gold Star mothers
    at the funeral of her son, Green Beret Staff Sergeant Aaron
    Rhett Butler from the 19th Special Forces Group, a National
    Guard noncommissioned officer killed in Afghanistan this past
    August. Aaron was a four-time Utah State wrestling champion in
    high school, and the seventh of eight children. In the midst of
    her grief, Mrs. Butler looked me straight in the eye and said,
    ``Stay on this. Finish it.'' Her resolve resonated with me, and
    reflects the extraordinary support we enjoy from our service
    member families. I know it resonates with this committee as
    well.
        SOCOM and our special operations forces are relentlessly
    focused on winning our current fights and preparing for all
    future threats facing our Nation. Again, thank you for your
    trust and support for this command and our special operations
    forces.
        [The prepared statement of General Thomas can be found in
    the Appendix on page 39.]
        Ms. Stefanik. Thank you, General Thomas. My first question,
    I want to relate it back to my opening statement. This
    subcommittee is charged with looking 5, 10, 20 years ahead. And
    I am concerned that we must have a sustainable CT
    [counterterrorism] and countering violent extremism strategy.
    We have made significant tactical gains, such as recent
    advances in Syria, Libya, and even Somalia, but only, in some
    cases, to see those hard-earned gains rolled back because we
    lack a larger strategy and diplomatic approach that could
    realize the tactical gains. How do you think we ensure that we
    have a strategy to build in the long term upon tactical
    successes? And that question is for both of you.
        Secretary West. Why don't I talk about the strategic
    aspects, and Tony, you can talk operations. Chairwoman, I think
    you have teased out the basic question that resides in the NDS,
    and that is as we shift focus, how do we sustain other efforts,
    especially if we have to become more austere in certain
    buckets, while maintaining, in my judgment, what is a best-in-
    class, competitive advantage that General Thomas' team has
    built in counterterror?
        When I look across the military missions, I am not sure if
    there is a bigger gap. Coming from the private sector, I think
    what is needed is a resource allocation model. That is underway
    at the Department. Secretary Mattis has begun to task people to
    look at an investment philosophy. Some of the things that have
    worked, for instance, have been partner forces. So some basic
    questions would be: What are the chances of success? The size
    of the spend? Can we turn it over to GP [General Purpose]? And
    then to your much larger question, how do we build an overall
    thesis to get us to where we want to be ahead 5 or 10 years
    from now?
        Ms. Stefanik. General Thomas.
        General Thomas. Chairwoman, I think I would speak
    comfortably for the Secretary when he would agree with your
    analysis that tactics without strategy, to quote Sun Tzu, is
    the noise before defeat. I think you emphasize, and I believe,
    again, the Secretary and I would both reinforce your point,
    that concomitant diplomatic efforts, with our operational
    endeavors, are critical to finishing any one of these fights.
    And I would specifically point right now to both Afghanistan,
    where we are surging assets to enable the discussions for
    reconciliation, which must happen to have final and sustainable
    security there. Obviously needs a very fervent diplomatic
    effort.
        And in Syria right now, you mentioned earlier we are in a
    phase in the moment of the physical defeat of the caliphate,
    that we are endeavoring to provide stability to those
    ungoverned spaces and to those people where we have conducted
    operations. And that is a critical role that has to come
    through in conjunction with our military operations.
        Ms. Stefanik. My next question also relates to my opening
    statement. General Thomas, what can this committee do to reduce
    your dependency on OCO [overseas contingency operations]?
        General Thomas. Chairwoman, luckily, the current funding
    bill as it stands makes the OCO point moot for these next 2
    years, as I understand it. It is only a respite, though. And so
    I am glad that you are emphasizing that, that currently, if we
    were to highlight the current dependency on OCO, it is one
    third of our budget, you know, a huge dependency, and I am
    hopeful in the out-years, that we are able to recognize that
    these are lasting capabilities in SOCOM, and your SOCOM that
    you all want to maintain, and, therefore, drive it from OCO
    into base [budget]. So I am hoping for that consideration in
    the out-years. Luckily again, I think the current budget
    addresses that.
        Ms. Stefanik. Secretary West, did you want to add, given
    your oversight role?
        Secretary West. Chairwoman, I would just say coming in
    again from the private sector, I think OCO, it seems to me, I
    am not an expert, but it has the potential to build some very
    bad habits in terms of planning. I need to dig into it more. I
    would be happy to get back to you with an assessment. I think
    it will take me about 3 months. But the potential is there to
    really hem what you talked about, which is beginning to
    transform the force out 5 or 10 years.
        [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
    on page 65.]
        Ms. Stefanik. And then my last question for the first round
    is we have seen the recent incident of overseas fitness
    trackers that telegraphed the positions and data of our service
    men and women. And that reminds us, of course, of the Internet
    of Things continues to change the game. Can you talk about how
    this is impacting your approach to force protection? What did
    we learn from the most recent incident, and what changes have
    been made? And in a broader sense, how concerned are you, in
    general, about the proliferation of more than 50 billion
    interconnected sensors and devices? General Thomas.
        General Thomas. Chairwoman, I think we all had that ``duh''
    kind of epiphany moment that the vulnerability that available
    databases like that can present to the force. So clearly, it
    was an immediate vulnerability that the Department was aware
    of, and that we are scrambling to make sure we have the right
    sort of policy in place. I think it also highlights the other
    aspect, though, the ability to manipulate and leverage data
    that we are also interested in becoming much better in the
    future.
        So this was an eye-opening exposure, and a vulnerability to
    the Department for a new and developmental technology. But we
    are endeavoring to, one, protect what we need to in terms of
    available data, but also be able to leverage it operationally
    as well.
        Ms. Stefanik. I now recognize Mr. Langevin.
        Mr. Langevin. Thank you, Madam Chair. Again, thanks to both
    of our witnesses for your testimony. General Thomas, as I
    mentioned in my opening statement, there continues to be a high
    demand for reliance on--increasing reliance on special
    operations forces by combatant commanders. And I believe, as I
    know you do as well, they have to be prudent in employment of
    the force to maintain readiness for current and future
    missions, as well as preserve strategic operations for our
    Nation.
        So I know that this issue has also been on the forefront of
    your mind, as we have discussed in our one-on-one meetings. And
    you have been vocal that SOF cannot be the solution to every
    problem. So can you please describe your efforts to ensure the
    force is employed to meet combatant commander requirements,
    while also addressing what I would call overreliance on SOF?
        And some concrete examples for the committee to demonstrate
    how you've pushed back in cases where it wouldn't be
    appropriate for SOF, and regular forces could take over the
    mission would be helpful. In addition to resource requirements,
    how can Congress be helpful on this front as well?
        General Thomas. Congressman, thanks for the question, and
    thanks for the time yesterday to catch up with you. As you
    implied, and certainly as we have looked back over the years,
    SOF has arguably been applied very liberally, with a dearth of
    strategy and with a dearth of a real vision towards end state.
    So while we are out in many locations, the reality is it is
    hard to measure. You know, what does the end state, what does
    sustainable security look like? There is significant oversight
    from the Department, specifically from my boss, and certainly
    with the Assistant Secretary, to ensure that we are prioritized
    in terms of our placement and our operations now and into the
    future. And I would tell you that the strategic context is
    coming together more coherently every day under the leadership
    of Secretary Mattis.
        So I am somewhat confident that we are getting that
    external pressure while we prioritize internally to the limited
    assets we have. If you were to ask me are we able to satisfy
    all the geographic combatant commanders' requirements, I would
    tell you no, we routinely tell geographic combatant commanders
    that we have no more to hand out at this time.
        In priority, we have given them out to the respective six
    geographic combatant commanders. And it forces consideration
    for other forces, whether they are international partners,
    conventional forces, or other capabilities that should be
    brought to bear. So it is a good, vibrant, professional
    discussion that, I think, is getting more in balance all the
    time.
        Mr. Langevin. Thank you. So the Army's first security force
    assistance brigade is going to deploy to Afghanistan this
    spring. Can you tell us how will that deployment to Afghanistan
    alleviate some of the burden on SOF? And what is your
    understanding of how future security force assistance brigade
    deployments will contribute to alleviating some of the burden
    on SOF?
        General Thomas. Yes, Congressman. Specifically, the
    security force assistance brigades [SFAB] that the Army has
    stood up in very rapid order--I give them a lot of credit for
    creating capability in little to no time--are specifically
    focused on the conventional Afghan kandaks, their conventional
    units in the field, which, right now, are not partnered, unlike
    our Afghan special operations force partners, who do have U.S.
    special forces and other allied forces aligned with them, and
    have been historically with them. So their specific purpose is
    for the conventional side. However, we are deriving some
    benefit from the creation of the SFAB as well.
        In fact, I talked to our commander on the ground as
    recently as 2 days ago. We specifically will get a few of these
    teams that will thicken our formation at the training base as
    well as accompany some of our new partnered force, some of the
    mobile forces to allow us to be more effective in the field. We
    are anxious for them to get to Afghanistan, and looking forward
    to the benefit they will provide to us.
        Mr. Langevin. I am sure. I hope that achieves the goal we
    intend. So as a result of section 1637 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for FY 2018, the Secretary of Defense has
    directed USSOCOM to establish a centralized capability for
    military information support operations, global messaging, and
    counter-messaging. The FY 2019 request includes $18 million to
    that end. So touch on this. How will USSOCOM fulfill its roles
    and responsibilities in this capacity to better understand,
    enable, and enhance the Department of Defense approach for
    maximum effects from the tactical to the strategic?
        And General Thomas, how will USSOCOM contribute to a whole-
    of-government effort in this space? And what agencies will you
    coordinate with? And lastly, Secretary West, have you received
    any guidance or participated in efforts related to section 1637
    of the FY 2018 NDAA that provides for the integration of
    strategic information operations and cyber-enabled information
    operations?
        General Thomas. Congressman, very quickly, and I will turn
    to the Assistant Secretary, the timing on this initiative from
    Congress couldn't be any better. Internally to SOCOM, we were
    already endeavoring to try and establish better capability at
    the headquarters level, in addition to our proponent--we are
    the proponent for military information support operations. So
    we produce and provided the field great capability in that
    regard. But we really did not have the requisite operational
    and potentially national level capabilities.
        So we are intent on providing that. I would offer to you
    form follows function. And so right now, we are in discussions
    with the Department in terms of what functions they endeavor,
    or they see us fulfilling. Our form, our structure will follow
    from that. But again, we are appreciative of the resourcing
    that is involved.
        We are already very, very well integrated with the Global
    Engagement Center. So you talked about other partners, that is
    the lead for the country and the State Department. We are well
    integrated with them, and we are hoping to enhance that
    relationship with them going forward, among other agencies.
        Mr. Langevin. Thank you.
        Secretary West. Sir, the SO/LIC office is tasked with
    helping to designate a senior DOD official. We are in the
    process of making recommendations right now to the Secretary. I
    would say from the strategic level, you asked what other
    agencies are involved. What is very important is that we get
    the message right, that it is a culturally attuned message so
    that no matter what we may gin up in the United States DOD, I
    think we need some country expertise. And then looking broadly
    at the formula of these types of operations, we need a partner
    force that begins to translate this with whom we have the same
    political end goals.
        Mr. Langevin. Thank you both. I yield back.
        Ms. Stefanik. Mr. Wilson.
        Mr. Wilson. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I would like to
    thank both members of the panel for being here. It is really
    reassuring on behalf of American families, your capabilities
    and competence, and in particular, to know that you are facing
    challenges from North Africa to the Philippines. And it is just
    encouraging to see your dedication and service. And General
    Thomas, a top priority is supporting the counterpropaganda
    mission and ensuring that the appropriate infrastructure is in
    place to guarantee success.
        In the FY 2017 NDAA, Congress expanded the mission of the
    Global Engagement Center [GEC] to include counter-state
    propaganda and disinformation efforts. What is the level of the
    collaboration between SOCOM and the Global Engagement Center?
    Do you believe there are sufficient opportunities for the
    cooperation and exchange of best practices? Is there anything
    Congress can do to further support this mission?
        General Thomas. Thanks, Congressman, and thanks for the
    time to link up with you earlier. As I mentioned earlier, and
    kind of to reinforce the point that we all know that
    relationships matter, we have had and enjoyed a very good
    preexisting relationship with the Global Engagement Center,
    primarily with a counterterrorism focus. As their charter has
    expanded, we are intent on being integrated with all their
    additional efforts and additional focus going forward. The
    Assistant Secretary talked about the NDS and the intent to
    compete short of conflict, in both a contact force and a blunt
    force construct as it is played out in the NDS.
        I think there are extraordinary opportunities. You
    mentioned propaganda. I don't know that I would term it as
    propaganda as much as competing in the information space
    against the extraordinary amount of disinformation, especially
    on the regional, kind of hegemonic level that we do need to
    counter in some way, shape, or form. And again, I think we will
    have the opportunity to do that going forward, and we look
    forward to it.
        Secretary West. Sir, let me just add that now that we have
    a budget, we have agreed with the State Department to launch a
    $15 million pilot program alongside the GEC. And the basic goal
    between DOD and State is to align to the NDS.
        Mr. Wilson. As an indication of how important what you are
    doing, we have the Chairman of the Armed Services Committee
    here with us, Mac Thornberry. So whatever we can do in
    Congress, the leadership certainly is very attentive. And
    Secretary West and General Thomas, another significant concern
    is the high operational tempo that has been placed on SOCOM for
    a significant period of time. Could you describe the impact of
    programs like the Preservation of the Force and Family [POTFF]
    have had on the morale of soldiers and their families? And
    also, describe efforts to focus on mental health services being
    made available to service members.
        General Thomas. Congressman, first and foremost, I am very
    grateful that several of my predecessors had the vision to see
    that this was going to be a protracted effort, both the current
    CT fight and really the other threats that have loomed for the
    country. And in seeing with that longer vision, they realized
    that we did not have the organic capability to sustain the
    force at the kind of tempo that we have been carrying now for a
    decade and a half. So in coordination with Congress, they
    endeavored to get the necessary funding to provide the
    Preservation of the Force and Family capabilities, which I
    would offer is, most importantly, the people that are involved,
    you know, the physical therapists, the social workers, the
    religious support folks, the psychiatrists--psychologists
    rather. Those are really the difference that is being made at
    the local level and our ability to sustain it. So again, thanks
    to my predecessors for setting that in motion. It is paying
    huge rewards for us in terms of sustaining the force.
        Mr. Wilson. And has there been an impact on recruitment
    with the emphasis on these programs?
        General Thomas. I would offer more in sustainment. So
    recruitment, they may not know it ahead of time, but when
    service members and their families become part of our force,
    and it is probably most palpable every time I go to Walter Reed
    and I am able to talk to service members and their families on
    the back side in terms of the care coalition aspects that we
    are able to provide for them, that they realize there is a
    distinct difference. One, we are encouraging service members,
    regardless of their injury, their illness, to stay in the
    force. And if they want to, we find ways to do that. And we are
    also able to sustain their families so they can, you know, work
    with us for the long haul. And again, it is almost
    indescribably powerful for our formation.
        Mr. Wilson. And I know that the facilities that you have
    developed have to--if a young person sees the world-class
    facilities that are being provided, it has just got to
    encourage people to remain in the service, but also recruiting.
    So it is just so meaningful. And just again, thank both of you
    for your service, and I yield back.
        Ms. Stefanik. Mrs. Murphy.
        Mrs. Murphy. Mr. West, General Thomas, thank you so much
    for being here today. And thank you, General Thomas, for taking
    a little time out of your schedule this morning to connect. In
    a prior life, I had the real honor to work for ASD SO/LIC in
    the SOCT [Special Operations & Combatting Terrorism]
    Directorate, and I have a deep appreciation for the
    capabilities that SOF brings to our national security. So thank
    you for all that you do. You talked a little bit about this in
    your opening remarks. Just given the new National Defense
    Strategy refocuses on great power conflict, will SOCOM seek to
    transition away from CVE [countering violent extremism] to
    other roles that more directly counter the military
    capabilities of peer competitors? And if so, what does that
    look like?
        Secretary West. Well, from one rookie to a veteran, I would
    say, as I said in the opening, that is a key question. I think,
    first of all, what is important, is sustaining the advantage
    that SOCOM has built up in countering VEO [violent extremist
    organizations]. But then along with many other programs and
    missions, we do have to become more austere. And so hard
    decisions have to be made in terms of when you begin to look
    from--essentially move from, I will use a start-up as an
    example, and you really begin to ask or assess what are
    diminishing returns, which are inevitable, against your spend.
        So, I think one of my basic tasks will be to work alongside
    General Thomas on the business administrative aspect of SOCOM.
    And part of that is just how he allocates his dollars and his
    mission prioritization.
        General Thomas. Congresswoman, I would like to think we
    anticipated the NDS a little bit in regards to one specific
    peer competitor, and that was at the invitation of our European
    allies, folks who we worked with in Afghanistan and Iraq, we
    were invited several years ago to join them in enhancing their
    capabilities in Eastern Europe. So we have had a multiyear
    effort there that has already borne some pretty serious
    dividends. I think we have already flexed in that regard. It
    opened our eyes to some capabilities that we were probably
    deficient in that we needed to enhance above and beyond the
    great capabilities we had developed for countering violent
    extremism. But we are an organization in transformation
    constantly, and I would like to think that we are keeping pace
    with where the NDS wants us to go.
        Mrs. Murphy. Great. And I look forward to continuing the
    conversation as you make that transition. You know I have had
    the pleasure of touring the SOFWERX a few times, and I am so
    impressed by it, I even brought colleagues down to take a peek
    at what you have got going on there. It is your business and
    technology incubator in downtown Tampa. I am just so very
    impressed every time I visit at how SOCOM uses flexible
    alternative contracting instruments like OTAs [other
    transaction authority] to such great effect. And I think when
    we think about some of the challenges that we are looking to
    address, having that ability to sort of hotwire the system a
    little bit and get into more rapid acquisitions is really
    important. And I have been impressed with your ability to do
    that.
        When I visited SOCOM headquarters late last year, I heard
    that your acting acquisition officer was detailed to CYBERCOM
    [U.S. Cyber Command] to help stand up their acquisition
    authority. Can you talk a little bit about SOCOM and CYBERCOM's
    relationship, particularly as it relates to sharing best
    practices in acquisitions?
        General Thomas. Congressman, first of all, thanks for your
    interest in SOFWERX. And if I could actually go back to a
    question that the chairwoman asked about RDT&E [research,
    development, test, and evaluation], because truthfully, there
    was an internal tension in our command on, are we putting
    sufficient money there? And so it is very prominent. But I
    would offer platforms like SOFWERX, other people's money, our
    ability to leverage academia, and then truthfully, as we are
    working with the Department, we had Ellen Lord down recently,
    and it struck me as she talks about $5 trillion worth of
    programs over the FYDP [Future Years Defense Program], that
    SOCOM needs to do a better job of leveraging the heft of the
    Department as it is swinging larger RDT&E dollars. So we are
    focused on it, but there are a couple different platforms.
        SOFWERX is unique, as you described. And we have been able
    to parlay it. Originally, I don't think it was seen as
    something that was either scalable or exportable, and it has
    become both. Scalable in terms of how it is assisting other
    services. The Army has used it to look at ground mobility
    vehicles, weapons, things like that. On our RDT&E back, which,
    again, it is a great cooperative effort. Exportable in terms of
    you mentioned CYBERCOM. It is also exportable to our foreign
    partners. We are able to share much more extensively right now.
    On your specific point of the relationship with CYBERCOM, you
    know, Admiral Mike Rogers and I have had kind of a historic
    relationship, very positive one from growing up together. But
    he encouraged us at Special Operations to leverage cyber in
    everything we are doing. He knows that SOCOM has an
    attractiveness in terms of an operational approach that is not
    irresistible, but it certainly--it forces considerations. So
    cyber operations is integral to everything we do. And we
    continue to enhance the relationship with them, most recently,
    in trying to help them with their acquisition process.
        Ms. Stefanik. Time has expired. Mr. Hice.
        Mr. Hice. Thank you, Madam Chair. General Thomas, you
    mentioned a while ago the Preservation of the Force and Family.
    I am very much interested in that. Of course, there is so much
    stress on our warriors and their families. I think this is a
    great program that now is 5 years old. You mentioned it is
    dealing with physical, mental, social, and spiritual well-
    being. And that program expires this year, although a request
    for proposal has just come out this week. To begin, after 5
    years now what have you learned from this program? And does the
    new request, what kind of changes are being proposed?
        General Thomas. Congressman, I think as a learning
    organization, with the establishment of the Preservation of the
    Force and Family program, we really hinged it on four pillars:
    psychological, spiritual, social, and human performance
    aspects. And so, we have been able to refine that over time as
    much driven by our operators, as most of our successes are,
    where they are able to refine both the requirements, but also,
    the ability to sustain the force over time.
        So again, it builds in resilience on the front end. And as
    we employ this force, and then parallel to that is our care
    coalition, which enables us to conduct an incredibly thorough
    Warrior Care Program for those who unfortunately become
    wounded, ill, or injured. So, in parallel, both those programs
    are keys to our sustainment going forward. We are continuing
    looking to how we can enhance that program. So I probably can
    come back to you with some more specifics. But it is an
    iterative program inside of what we have been doing very
    capably for the last couple of years.
        Mr. Hice. So are you aware of any significant changes from
    what is being proposed now from 5 years ago?
        General Thomas. I don't think significant changes. I think
    probably a point that I should bring out to you is, again,
    imitation being the finest form of flattery, the other services
    are going to school on what we are doing and trying to
    implement it. And we are trying to share that as aggressively
    as possible. So I think we are onto something that is positive
    for not only our force, but for the larger Department. And I
    will get back to you on some specifics that we are considering.
        [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
    on page 65.]
        Mr. Hice. Thank you. Mr. West.
        Secretary West. I was just going to say, sir, not to be a
    force of negativity, but part of my job will be and is to
    scrutinize P-11 programs, or SOF-peculiar programs like this,
    where the services have something that looks like it, but not
    quite. I usually dive into the statistics. And the statistics I
    have seen so far are really good. I am sure we will get into
    the results of the cultural survey that was commissioned about
    3 months ago here. But my initial cut at the data says that
    something is working well, and I would have to point to this
    program as among, say, of the flagship programs that I would
    think has a big impact.
        Mr. Hice. That is really encouraging to hear. Would you
    say, while you are up here, that between the four pillars that
    they are fairly well balanced, or is there an imbalance and
    emphasis in one area over the other?
        Secretary West. I don't know, sir. I don't know, sir.
        Mr. Hice. General, would you?
        General Thomas. Congressman, I think it is pretty balanced.
    Where we are I think endeavoring to develop, because we are
    learning, is in the human performance domain. I think there is
    a lot of uncharted ground there. We have sports teams going to
    school on us, professional teams going to school on what we are
    learning. So I think it is indicative of an environment where
    there is some real opportunities, but we haven't developed them
    yet.
        Mr. Hice. I think it is really encouraging that this
    program is even here. The importance of taking care of these
    warriors and their families is just huge. And hats off to you
    for taking this seriously, and for doing a good job, and the
    fact that statistically, there are evidence to back up that
    this is succeeding in what its mission and purpose is. It is
    very encouraging. So I thank you very much for that. And I
    yield back.
        Ms. Stefanik. Thank you, Mr. Hice. We will now go to the
    second round of questions. General Thomas, you touched upon
    this in response to Mrs. Murphy's question, but as I mentioned
    in my opening statement, we know that our near-peer adversaries
    are investing in the development of AI, synthetic biology,
    quantum computing. And again, we are the Emerging Threats
    Subcommittee, so we are looking to the future to ensure that we
    maintain the edge when it comes to these technological tools.
    With that said, can you describe, and you said there was back
    and forth within SOCOM, why the budget request decreases our
    R&D investments for the second year in a row?
        General Thomas. Chairwoman, I probably didn't address that
    accurately in that while there is tension for where and how we
    are spending our money, I am comfortable that we are
    sufficiently immersed in R&D efforts with both our allotted
    money, other people's money, and other platforms. So I can
    probably give you a more comprehensive laydown where I guess
    the proof of the point is, I can't tell you an area that I
    think we are lacking in terms of spending authority to pursue
    RDT&E.
        On the specifics of machine learning, that is a great
    example, because there is probably nothing I am more passionate
    about right now than the opportunities that SOCOM has to
    leverage machine learning to an extraordinary level. We had the
    innovation group come to us with Admiral McRaven about a year
    and a half ago, and some senior folks from Google and Alphabet
    gave us rave remarks for our people, our ability to prototype,
    and then gave us less than satisfactory marks for machine
    learning. And we took it as a tasker.
        And since that time, we have poured a lot of energy, a lot
    of focus, more importantly, practical applications into
    everything we are doing. I devoured a book, ``Machine,
    Platform, Crowd,'' not too long ago by McAfee from up at MIT
    [Massachusetts Institute of Technology], that challenges
    corporations, but apropos to us, at every level and every mark,
    why you aren't embracing machine learning. And I can tell you
    that is the ethos of our command right now as we are going
    forward. I really hope that we not only will we improve our own
    capabilities, but that it will be scalable to the Department as
    kind of an exemplar for what we can do.
        Ms. Stefanik. So are we leveraging DARPA [Defense Advanced
    Research Projects Agency] and service R&D efforts? In what
    areas are they helping you the most?
        General Thomas. Ma'am, I would probably be hard-pressed
    right now to tell you the specifics, but the answer is yes.
    Anybody and everybody who--I couch this free money, that is not
    meant to be kind of pejorative, it is folks that are doing
    similar lines of work or similar interested areas, we are
    investing in. I think that the beauty of it and where it plays
    to our maybe us not having the RDT&E, is we provide platform,
    we provide the forum for applications of a lot of these
    prototypical efforts that I think creates kind of a symbiotic
    marriage of opportunity there.
        Ms. Stefanik. And General Thomas, in terms of countering
    unconventional warfare [UW] threats, are we closer to linking
    all of our tools and capabilities, such as conventional,
    unconventional, economic, cyber, intel, and IO [information
    operations] in an effort to counter adversarial threats such as
    Russia?
        General Thomas. Chairwoman, I would like to actually give
    you a few examples in the closed session afterwards, but the
    bottom line is yes. I think the unique approach of our joint
    task force, our inherent nature of who we are allows us to
    bring all those elements to bear in a coordinated, coherent
    fashion. So again, I will provide at least one very powerful
    vignette in the closed session, but we see and we leverage all
    those tools as part of what we do.
        Ms. Stefanik. Thank you for that, General Thomas. And
    before I recognize Mr. Langevin, I just wanted to follow up on
    Secretary West's comments regarding irregular warfare
    authority. Regarding section 1202 and the new unconventional
    warfare authority, I was pleased to see you commit to the
    delivery of the UW strategy in the opening statement, but I do
    want to emphasize for the record that without that strategy,
    there is no UW authority, which is why we have the 15-day
    notice and wait as well. So we look forward to talking about
    the strategy first before we move forward with the authority.
    And with that, I recognize Mr. Langevin.
        Mr. Langevin. Thank you, Madam Chair. Secretary West,
    section 922 of the FY 2017 NDAA focused on solidifying and
    strengthening the roles and responsibilities of the Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity
    Conflict to effectively conduct internal oversight of, and
    advocacy on behalf of SOCOM. I know you are new, you are just
    days on the job, but from your standpoint right now initially,
    what is the status of the implementation of 922, and what is
    the status of the report on implementation of 922 required by
    section 1074 of the FY 2018 bill? And as you know, Congress has
    expressed concern about inadequate resources being provided to
    ASD SO/LIC to fill roles and responsibilities. What efforts are
    underway to define and resource SO/LIC?
        Secretary West. Congressman, let me take your second
    question first. We will turn in that report on time. Another
    report was just mentioned. I like to meet deadlines. To your
    first question, the first thing I did was study the history. I
    think pathfinding requires, you know, where you are coming from
    to figure out where you are going. It is clear this was almost
    a 30-year culminating point, 922 specifically. And I think it
    is very timely. In the backdrop of Secretary Mattis calling for
    business reform as one of his three pillars, I think this
    reinvigoration is long overdue.
        General Thomas has a really unique role in that he is a
    very busy COCOM [combatant command] commander with three
    separate global synchronization hats. And then now at $13.6
    billion, he and we now are heading a Fortune 500 enterprise. So
    on the business leadership front, I think the basic task is to
    institutionalize what SOCOM does very well and preserve its
    unique attributes. The chairwoman mentioned, for instance,
    DARPA. I think there are four or five other areas at DOD that
    looks very much like DARPA. So one of our tasks will be within
    the building to connect this thriving enterprise in Tampa Bay
    to the federation.
        Mr. Langevin. General Thomas, and both Secretary West, can
    you describe how 922 has shaped the relationship between SOCOM
    and SO/LIC? Any further comments on that? General Thomas, you
    want to comment?
        General Thomas. Congressman, as I mentioned in my preamble,
    we are embracing the 922 language as the natural evolution of
    the relationship between us and ASD SO/LIC. I have been
    interested in the specific language that places Assistant
    Secretary of Defense West in our chain of command to the
    Secretary for the man, train, and equip portfolio. And I am
    looking forward to developing the specific functions and
    interrelations there. But I think that will help us be better
    integrated with the Department going forward.
        Mr. Langevin. Thank you. General Thomas, in December you
    were quoted on the devastating effects Task Force Aries
    delivered when synchronized with other military and
    intelligence partners. Despite these types of operations, you
    mentioned that we are not fully where you would like to be with
    these capabilities. Can you please describe your cyber
    requirements? How is USSOCOM synchronizing and coordinating
    with U.S. Cyber Command? And do you find you have more policy
    and authority challenges or commanders who have difficulty
    integrating the capability in the cyber realm?
        General Thomas. Congressman, again, we enjoy an
    extraordinary and historic relationship with CYBERCOM. The
    level of support is almost indescribably powerful. When I
    mentioned and contrasted very successful operations there
    relative to areas that I think we can improve, it is really
    emphasizing that in the counter violent extremist mission set,
    we have been able to break ground and really be a pathfinder
    for new and developmental capabilities that I think need to be
    carried over to other mission sets, to other operational
    domains that I think Mike Rogers would agree, we need some
    iterations, we need some reps [representatives] in those
    environments, which we have had a good number in countering
    violent extremism, but I think they could be passed across, and
    we are trying to do that.
        Mr. Langevin. Very good. Thank you. And General Thomas,
    what is the situation with North Korea? How has that impacted
    the force? And is SOF prepared to respond to a crisis on the
    peninsula?
        General Thomas. Congressman, as part of the joint force, we
    are always endeavoring to be prepared for any and all
    contingencies. So suffice it to say, we are training, as we
    always have, to be prepared for that contingency, among others.
        Mr. Langevin. And I will probably have some follow-up on
    the closed session on that. With that, I yield back.
        Ms. Stefanik. Mr. Hice.
        Mr. Hice. Thank you, Madam Chair. At this time I have no
    further questions.
        Ms. Stefanik. Mrs. Murphy.
        Mrs. Murphy. Madam Chair, I will also reserve for the
    closed session.
        Ms. Stefanik. Thank you very much. We will now move into
    closed session.
        [Whereupon, at 3:00 p.m., the subcommittee proceeded in
    closed session.]

    =======================================================================

                                A P P E N D I X

                               February 15, 2018
    =======================================================================

                  PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                               February 15, 2018

    =======================================================================

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    =======================================================================

                  WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING

                                  THE HEARING

                               February 15, 2018

    =======================================================================

                 RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MS. STEFANIK

        Secretary West. In the FY 2019 budget rollout, DOD indicated that
    the FY 2020 DOD budget and future plan are to reduce reliance on OCO
    significantly. USSOCOM will be a part of that shift from OCO to the
    base budget. Congressional support is critical in shifting OCO to the
    base budget. OCO constitutes one-third of USSOCOM's FY 2019 budget
    request. At this time, we believe that approximately 90 percent of
    USSOCOM's requested OCO is enduring.
        Increasing base funding will result in more effective
    implementation of readiness and modernization efforts over the long
    term. For example, it will improve procurement of warfighter equipment
    (e.g., special operations forces (SOF) fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft
    modernization; SOF maritime undersea and surface capabilities;
    intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR); and tactical
    vehicle modernization). In terms of readiness, it will improve SOF
    combat units' ability to plan and implement training in a reliable and
    consistent manner.   [See page 9.]
                                     ______

                   RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. HICE
        General Thomas. The command conducted extensive market research in
    order to ensure we have captured both lessons learned from the current
    POTFF programs and contract, but also from other major source
    selections the command has recently executed and modified the RFP
    accordingly. Some of the most significant changes are outlined below.
    We experienced performance issues and turnover related to the disparate
    salaries offered for the same labor categories and at times within the
    same geographic locations by the various companies supporting these
    requirements. We did not anticipate that some subcontractors would pay
    20%-30% less annually than others. Additionally, direct salaries have
    in some instances limited our ability to fill positions, either because
    they are much lower than those offered by other agencies or too low for
    incentivizing performance in remoter locations such as Cannon AFB, NM.
    Therefore, the RFP includes additional requirements for a more in-depth
    price analysis focused on the total direct compensation offered to
    employees, regardless of which prime or subcontractor is providing the
    employee in order to ensure commensurate compensation packages are
    being offered across all team members (both prime and subcontractors)
    and the surrounding labor markets, as well as ensuring they will have
    the ability to retain the current incumbent personnel IAW FAR provision
    52.222-46. Failure to effectively manage subcontractors to ensure
    consistency in the support across the entire POTFF program has caused
    several performance challenges. Therefore, the RFP and the Government
    Quality Assurance and oversight processes include a greater emphasis on
    subcontract management and holding the prime contractor accountable for
    their subcontractor performance. This includes such things as requiring
    offerors to address how they will ensure the proper flow down of all
    contract requirements, handle subcontractors who are performing poorly,
    or those team members that are unable to effectively retain or recruit
    personnel. Moreover, offerors will be required to ensure processes and
    procedures are standardized across their team as well as describe how
    their retention plans will ensure the ability to maintain the required
    technical expertise and allow for developmental growth/career
    progression. Five years ago, the RFP had a larger focus on ensuring the
    companies (holistically across their proposed team) demonstrated
    extensive knowledge of both the various Special Operations units being
    supported and the POTFF programs (i.e. both Human Performance Programs
    and the Psychological Resiliency). However, we found that although they
    should still have some understanding of the SOF non-traditional
    training environment, it is not as essential to have companies who are
    ``experts'' in the POTFF domains or SOF units, but rather just
    expertise resident in the key personnel proposed to perform the
    recruiting and vetting of the service providers that understand the
    qualifications (i.e. having an Operational psychologist background).
    Additionally, companies that have demonstrated experience in the human
    resource-like functions (recruiting, managing credentials, etc.)
    Therefore, the RFP includes language that focuses more on the
    recruitment and retention of personnel rather than the knowledge of
    existing programs. Offerors are now required to provide labor rates for
    all 21 labor categories across all 26 geographical locations in order
    to avoid delays and the possibility of paying unreasonably high labor
    rates once we are in a sole source environment post award. The
    transition requirements were very different 5 years ago when we were
    first establishing the ``enterprise'' contract. The number of current
    incumbent personnel from existing contracts that were being
    consolidated into the enterprise was much lower than the number of
    incumbent personnel currently working under the current POTFF contract
    (approx. 346). Therefore, the RFP contains a greater emphasis on
    transition and ensuring the offeror's plan demonstrates an
    understanding of and the ability to retain those critical ``No Fail''
    incumbent positions (identified within PWS, Appendix 2) and how they
    will mitigate the risks associated with the loss of those existing
    relationships that have been built over time within the components. The
    revised Performance Work Statement contains revised qualifications for
    some existing labor categories, the removal of one labor category and
    five new labor categories that were identified by the component
    commands and to support emerging POTFF initiatives. The new categories
    include the following:
          Neuropsychologist: To support SOF neurocognitive
    psychological baselining efforts
          Data Scientist I & II: To replace the baccalaureate
    trained ``Data Analyst'' labor category on the previous POTFF contract.
    The POTFF requires a higher level of analytic capability than
    previously provided. The Data Scientists I & II require a masters
    degree and Ph.D. respectively.
          Psychometrist: To support SOF neurocognitive and
    psychological baselining, and assessment/selection activities.
          Psychiatric Nurse Practitioner: To address specific gaps
    in access to care. Primarily for medication/medical management.
          Senior Strength & Conditioning Specialist: To provide
    greater responsiveness to a units' requirements.
        [See page 15.]

    ?

    =======================================================================

                  QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING

                               February 15, 2018

    =======================================================================

                       QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. SPEIER

        Ms. Speier. General Thomas, you mentioned SOCOM's continued
    coordination with embassies in countries and regions where SOCOM is
    present. How might cuts to FY19 State Department funding impact SOCOM's
    missions around the globe? How would an increase in defense funding
    with a simultaneous decrease in diplomacy funding affect the success of
    these missions in FY19/20 and in fiscal years to come?
        General Thomas. The SOCOM position is that there will be no direct
    impact to SOCOM's ability to carry out missions around the globe.
    However, if Embassy staffing is impacted by a lack of funding, some of
    SOCOM's specific missions could be indirectly and negatively impacted
    on a case-by-case basis. Politically sensitive missions in certain host
    nations require embassy oversight and coordination. A shortfall in
    staffing could slow or even disrupt execution. Additionally, there is a
    potential that staffing shortfalls could lead to greater DOS/USEMB
    reliance on SOCOM elements that work within embassies and have
    operational funding like Military Information Support Teams (MISTs) and
    Civilian/Military Support Elements (CMSEs). A reduction of embassy
    staff could potentially degrade or make it more difficult to coordinate
    w/host nation personnel for proposed SOF activities (e.g. Joint
    Combined Exercise Training (JCET) and Counter-Narcotics Training (CNT)
    events). Additionally, any cuts to Title 22 funding overseen by the
    State Department may negatively impact host nation willingness and
    ability to cooperate with SOCOM, as well as degrade future performance
    of host nation forces.'' Strategically, any diminution in the U.S.
    government's ability to drive diplomatic solutions to today's problems,
    due to decreased staff, funding, programs, will likely mean conflicts
    and the conditions that lead to conflict will endure, and SOCOM's ops
    tempo and deployments will be affected.
        Ms. Speier. General Thomas, USSOCOM continues to use ``live tissue
    training,'' which uses live animals for teaching combat medics, a
    practice abandoned by virtually every U.S. hospital and medical school
    due to its high cost and the rise of more effective simulators and
    virtual reality for training. How much did SOCOM spend on live tissue
    training in each of the last five fiscal years? How much does SOCOM
    intend to spend on this training in FY18? How many animals were killed
    for SOCOM's live tissue training exercises in the past five fiscal
    years? To what extent has SOCOM evaluated the long-term cost savings
    that would result from switching to simulators for medical training?
    What was the finding of this evaluation?
        General Thomas. A single funding breakdown solely for live tissue
    training (LTT) is not available. USSOCOM does not conduct or fund live
    tissue training as a separate activity from Medical Readiness Training.
    (Medical Readiness Training, as defined in DODI 1322.24, includes all
    training for personnel, medical or non-medical, to treat combat wounds
    and injuries; has both initial and sustainment requirements.) The
    resources used to conduct LTT are the same facilities, ranges,
    instructors, support personnel, vehicles, equipment, and supply items
    necessary to conduct non-animal based medical readiness training. These
    resources are used throughout the ``crawl, walk, run'' progression of
    medical readiness training, of which LTT is a small, but critically
    important component. The following numbers represent the number of live
    animal models used by USSOCOM personnel for the years that documents
    are maintained. All activities are conducted in accordance with animal
    welfare regulations and policies, approved by an Institutional Animal
    Care and Use Committee (IACUC), and use humane euthanasia per the
    American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Guidelines for the
    euthanasia of animals:
        FY2017: animals used = 5,244; personnel trained = 7,261
        FY2016: animals = 6,428; personnel trained = 9,823 (note: includes
    Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE) training and animals
    used in field training)
        FY2015: animals = 6,469; personnel trained = 9,925 (note: includes
    SERE training and animals used in field training)
        Note: DODI 3216.01, Use of Animals in DOD Programs, directs animal
    use records be retained for three years beyond the end of the RDT&E or
    training event.
        Since 2015, USSOCOM has actively pursued high-fidelity, medical
    simulation and virtual reality training technologies through our annual
    broad agency announcements and technical experimentation events.
    Additionally, USSOCOM has worked with the DOD Program Executive
    Officer--Simulation, Training, and Instrumentation (Joint Program
    Manager--Medical Modeling & Simulation) and the Defense Health Agency's
    (DHA) Joint Program Committee (JPC)-1 in an effort to develop and
    employ the most advanced medical modeling and simulation technologies
    available. The following figures represent the DOD Science and
    Technology Medical Simulation investment portfolio provided by the
    Director, JPC-1 in reference to the 14 Feb 2018 HASC briefing:
        FY12--$44.3M; FY13--$20.0M; FY14--$16.8M; FY15--$20.5M; FY16--
    $24.0M;
        FY17--$23.5M; FY18--$20.0M; FY19--$28.0M (projected)
        Many of the currently available medical simulation tools are the
    products of Department of Defense investments (e.g., MATT Series 1500
    Trauma Trainer, AirwayPlus Lifecast (APL) Upper Torso Trainer (Kforce
    Government Solutions, Inc.), and the TraumaManSystem (Simulab
    Corporation)).
        USSOCOM will continue to support the Department's efforts to move
    towards training simulator technologies where a synthetic patient model
    could fully replace the use of animals in USSOCOM's combat casualty
    care training curricula.
                                     ______

                       QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. WILSON
        Mr. Wilson. Secretary West, I would like to discuss some of your
    efforts in information operations. Specifically, what I am concerned
    about is the dispersion of extremist elements from the Middle East as
    our military efforts against ISIS and al-Qaida continue to be
    successful. Many of these individuals are fleeing to Europe, Africa and
    Central Asia and attempting to reconstitute operations in those areas.
    Part of reconstituting operations includes disseminating extremist
    propaganda and attempting to radicalize and recruit locals in those
    areas. Are you concerned about this? What are we doing to establish
    information operations in these areas to counter the propaganda and
    recruitment efforts of extremist organizations? Is this enough?
        I am particularly concerned about Africa and I feel that you must
    have the capability to rapidly establish information operations to
    counter threats as they arise. To ensure that approaches and messages
    are appropriate to the varied languages and cultures in areas of Africa
    targeted by extremists, effective information operations should
    leverage the unique abilities of local nationals to develop locally
    tailored platforms and messages. SOCOM has leveraged such a model with
    significant success, resulting in message dissemination that undermines
    extremist activities and messages within hours, not days. Integral to
    this model is a monitoring and evaluation system that allows SOCOM to
    closely, and in near real time, monitor the messages themselves, and
    their impact. What do you need to replicate this model in other
    operations?
        In your opinion, what, if any, changes to authorities might help
    you conduct more effective information operations?
        Secretary West. The Department of Defense (DOD) remains concerned
    about violent extremist organizations' efforts to propagandize,
    radicalize, and recruit in Europe, Africa, and Central Asia as we
    militarily defeat ISIS and al-Qaeda. DOD has already been conducting
    Military Information Support Operations (MISO) to counter
    radicalization and recruitment in those areas either directly or
    working by, with, and through our allies and partners. The Secretary of
    Defense recently directed U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) to
    consolidate DOD's MISO web operations into a global operating model in
    support of the Geographic Combatant Commands to expand the competitive
    space against our adversaries in contested zones. USSOCOM will leverage
    its unique abilities and previous lessons learned as DOD develops the
    implementation plan for this effort. The DOD has sufficient statutory
    authority to conduct information operations.
        Mr. Wilson. General Thomas, it seems to me that rapid response is
    especially important in spaces where violent extremists, Russians, and
    other foreign actors are able to influence the information environment
    much more quickly than we are. I have taken note of an information
    operations model that SOCOM is leveraging that has been particularly
    effective. It includes training and otherwise enabling trusted local
    nationals--who fluently speak the language with the proper dialect and
    intimately understand local history and customs--to develop and amplify
    messaging that undermines extremist activities and messages. This model
    enables rapid relevant responses to destabilizing messages and events
    in near real-time, not days or weeks, while simultaneously allowing
    SOCOM to closely monitor messages and impact. Our European allies are
    also leveraging a similar model with great success. What steps are you
    taking to replicate this model and share these best practices with
    other commands within DOD that engage in information operations?
        General Thomas. USSOCOM deploys Military Information Support Teams
    (MIST) to conduct Military Information Support Operations (MISO) in
    direct support of Geographic Combatant Commanders' (GCC) military
    objectives--within and outside of areas of hostilities--with Chief of
    Mission concurrence. This support includes advising and assisting
    partner nations' information professionals--who fluently speak local
    languages with the proper dialect and intimately understand local
    history and customs--to develop and amplify messaging that undermines
    adversary activities and increases our partners' abilities to
    effectively address shared security concerns in their regions. Finally,
    USSOCOM leverages experience developing counter terrorism MISO programs
    to assist GCCs as they develop MISO programs that provide authorities
    under which combatant commanders can more quickly and effectively plan
    and execute MISO in support to achieve their assigned missions.
                                     ______

                       QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. LAMBORN
        Mr. Lamborn. Do you think section 922 of the FY17 NDAA gave you the
    tools you need to be effective in providing oversight of USSOCOM or
    does this committee need to do more to assist you?
        Secretary West. The DOD is continuing to look at how to best
    implement 922 as an important component of the new NDS's emphasis on
    reform. SO/LIC has completed a number of important actions that lay the
    groundwork for full and successful implementation of Section 922.
    Examples include:
          The Deputy Secretary of Defense designated ASD(SO/LIC) as
    a member of the Deputy's Management Action Group (in addition to
    membership by the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy).
          The Deputy Secretary of Defense designated ASD(SO/LIC) as
    a participant in selected Special Access Programs Oversight Council
    meetings.
          The Deputy Secretary of Defense delegated to ASD(SO/LIC)
    approval authority for selected civilian personnel actions equivalent
    to Military Department Secretaries.
          The Deputy Secretary of Defense approved formal
    establishment of the Special Operations Policy and Oversight Council
    (SOPOC) and approved a Department of Defense Directive on the SOPOC.
          The Deputy Secretary of Defense provided fiscal guidance
    to ASD(SO/LIC).
        Additionally, over the next year, ASD(SO/LIC) expects to approve
    USSOCOM's budget submission and jointly approve guidance documents
        Mr. Lamborn. Specifically, what has your office done to assess
    USSOCOM's Preservation of the Force and Families (POTFF) program? Based
    on your substantial background in the business sector, do you think a
    personal services contract is the best approach? What are the lessons
    learned from the previous five years that you want SOCOM to implement
    during your tenure as ASD SO/LIC?
        Secretary West. OSD has conducted several assessments of USSOCOM's
    POTFF Program in which SO/LIC either participated or provided
    coordination. Specifically, the Office of the Under Secretary of
    Defense for Personnel & Readiness commissioned a 2015 MITRE Corporation
    study of USSOCOM's POTFF Program. In addition, the Office of the
    Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) is currently
    completing an evaluation of the POTFF Program. SO/LIC was provided the
    completed MITRE report and will also receive CAPE's findings. We are
    committed to ensuring that USSOCOM's POTFF Program is an effective and
    properly resourced and managed program with appropriate SO/LIC
    oversight.
        Per 10 USC Sec. 1091, personal services contractors are authorized
    for the POTFF Program. As medical professionals, and due to the
    embedded nature of POTFF Program personnel, it is important that POTFF
    Program personnel are under continuous supervision and control of a
    Government officer or employee. Moreover, as when credentialed by the
    medical treatment facility, liability concerns dictate the use of
    personal services contractors. However, DOD is fully committed to
    ensuring that USSOCOM's POTFF Program is an effective and properly
    resourced and managed program that is subject to appropriate SO/LIC
    oversight.
        One of the most important lessons learned is demonstrating return
    on investment (ROI) of U.S. taxpayer dollars, and so we are interested
    in the long-term ROI of the POTFF Program in order to evaluate the
    existing program more thoroughly and improve the effectiveness of POTFF
    efforts. What is required is statistical tracking. USSOCOM is
    synchronizing efforts to identify and capture relevant statistical data
    more accurately to show long-term ROI. We will work with USSOCOM to
    ensure the POTFF Program's effectiveness in supporting special
    operations forces' readiness.
        Mr. Lamborn. This committee has been briefed on the benefits of the
    POTFF program and the associated metrics of success. The briefings seem
    to center on the special operator's physical enhancements. What seems
    missing from every briefing to date, are the metrics and outcomes
    associated with the behavioral health part of the program. What are the
    behavioral outcomes you are trying to achieve with the program and how
    are you measuring them?
        General Thomas. It is important to note that all of SOCOM's
    clinical behavioral healthcare personnel are funded by the Defense
    Health Agency and privileged to practice through local Medical
    Treatment Facilities. With this in mind, the DOD and Services have
    required processes for monitoring quality and effectiveness for
    behavioral health providers. The command does monitor rates of
    diagnoses, suicide behaviors, and access to care among other
    indicators. Since the implementation of POTFF, the rates of depression,
    Post-traumatic stress, and alcohol abuse have remained stable or in
    some instances declined. Notably, the number of suicides has dropped by
    nearly 70%.
        The command is currently developing and testing technologies and
    processes for conducting psychological and neurocognitive assessments
    for SOF. This data will promote early intervention and also provide a
    solid foundation of data from which the command may assess the
    effectiveness of POTFF and other programs.
        Mr. Lamborn. Is participation in the POTFF program mandatory? If
    so, how do measure participation and how does the data makes its way
    into the special operator's official medical record? What happens with
    the family support data?
        General Thomas. Participation in the Human Performance Program is
    mandatory. All operators must be assessed twice a year using criteria
    specific to SOF, and based on those assessments Human Performance
    Programs are customized to the needs of the individual operator. Other
    aspects of the program, such as behavioral health, are voluntary, but
    encouraged by leaders at all levels. Since beginning the POTFF in 2012,
    the number of SOF having used behavioral health has doubled and POTFF's
    embedded service providers routinely rank highest in satisfaction and
    utility when compared with other sources of behavioral healthcare. We
    believe that the presence of behavioral health providers embedded
    within the units, along with leadership support, has impacted the
    stigma of seeking care. Although we still have work to do in this area,
    we have made significant progress.
        Many of the professional disciplines within the POTFF are
    credentialed medical providers. These providers include: physical
    therapists, athletic trainers, performance dieticians, social workers,
    psychologists and nurse case managers. As such, these providers are
    required to document their clinical work in the electronic health
    record. The local credentialing authority, typically the medical
    treatment facility commander, also provides routine quality assurance
    and oversight as with any other medical provider on an installation.
        With regard to family support data, aside from the authority
    granted to SOCOM to conduct family programs, the command is unable to
    support family support activities. This limitation was reinforced by
    Congress in 2014. For those programs that SOCOM is permitted to execute
    under Title X Sec 1788a, each activity is assessed and reported to
    Congress annually. SOCOM also works closely with the Services and OSD's
    Office of Family Policy to meet the needs of our families. OSD and the
    Services have been highly responsive to SOCOM's requirements.
        Mr. Lamborn. Do you think the Services should adopt a POTFF-like
    program to support their respective forces and families?
        General Thomas. The Services would likely benefit from adopting a
    POTFF-like capability tailored to their particular needs. SOCOM has
    engaged with each of the Services, OSD and partner nation forces
    regarding the structure and programmatic details of the POTFF program.
    Currently, each of the Services is planning or testing some variant of
    the POTFF program. SOCOM implemented the POTFF to specifically address
    pressures on special operations personnel and their families. While the
    stressors and occupational requirements for service members and
    families within the conventional forces may differ somewhat from those
    experienced by SOF, the underlying principles of POTFF are applicable
    in any military setting. Embedding multidisciplinary teams within
    tactical units, no matter the Service, is a sound approach to enhancing
    the quality of life and readiness of Service Members and their
    families.
        Mr. Lamborn.As your senior in the administrative chain of command,
    what do you think ASD SO/LIC's role should be in overseeing the
    promotions and professional military education compared to the Military
    Departments?
        General Thomas. ASD SO/LIC should be afforded the opportunity to
    coordinate on Service changes to promotion and professional military
    education policies and processes, prior to publication and
    implementation, to ensure SOF equities are considered. The latest
    assessment shows the majority of Special Operations Forces continue to
    experience promotion selection rates that are comparable to, or better
    than, the rates of their peers in the conventional forces.
    Additionally, professional military education opportunities for Special
    Operations personnel are adequately available in the appropriate
    Military department.

                                      [all]