[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]