[House Report 116-709]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                 Union Calendar No. 593
116th Congress, 2d Session - - - - - - - - - - - - House Report 116-709

                        REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES

                                 of the

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                                for the

                     ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS


                                     
		[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     


 December 31, 2020.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
            
            
            
		   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

42-828 			    WASHINGTON : 2021            
            
            
            
            
                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                     
                     One Hundred Sixteenth Congress

                    ADAM SMITH, Washington, Chairman

SUSAN A. DAVIS, California           WILLIAM M. ``MAC'' THORNBERRY, 
JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island          Texas
RICK LARSEN, Washington              JOE WILSON, South Carolina
JIM COOPER, Tennessee                ROB BISHOP, Utah
JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut            MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio
JOHN GARAMENDI, California           MIKE ROGERS, Alabama
JACKIE SPEIER, California            K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas
TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii                DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado
DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey          ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia
RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona               VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri
SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts          AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia
SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California        MO BROOKS, Alabama
ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland, Vice     BRADLEY BYRNE, Alabama
    Chair                            SAM GRAVES, Missouri
RO KHANNA, California                ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York
WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts    SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee
FILEMON VELA, Texas                  RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana
ANDY KIM, New Jersey                 TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
KENDRA S. HORN, Oklahoma             MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin
GILBERT RAY CISNEROS, Jr.,           MATT GAETZ, Florida
    California                       DON BACON, Nebraska
CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania       JIM BANKS, Indiana
JASON CROW, Colorado                 LIZ CHENEY, Wyoming
XOCHITL TORRES SMALL, New Mexico     JACK BERGMAN, Michigan
ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan             MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey           (Vacancy)
VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas              (Vacancy)
DEBRA A. HAALAND, New Mexico
JARED F. GOLDEN, Maine
LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts
ELAINE G. LURIA, Virginia
ANTHONY BRINDISI, New York

                     Paul Arcangeli, Staff Director
             
             Zach Steacy, Director, Legislative Operations
                         LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

                              ----------                              

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                 Washington, DC, December 31, 2020.
Hon. Cheryl L. Johnson,
Clerk of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Ms. Johnson: Pursuant to clause 1(d) of rule XI of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, I present herewith the 
report on the activities of the Committee on Armed Services for 
the 116th Congress.
            Sincerely,
                                              Adam Smith, Chairman.
                                              
                                              
                                              
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Powers and Duties................................................     1
Committee Rules..................................................     4
Composition of the Committee on Armed Services...................    17
Committee Staff..................................................    21
Committee Meetings and Hearings..................................    23
Legislative Activities...........................................    23
Oversight Activities.............................................    29
Publications.....................................................   101



                                                 Union Calendar No. 593
116th Congress    }                                     {      Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session       }                                     {     116-709

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



 
  REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES FOR THE 
                             116TH CONGRESS

                                _______
                                

 December 31, 2020.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Smith, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                           POWERS AND DUTIES


                               Background

    The House Committee on Armed Services, a standing committee 
of Congress, was established on January 2, 1947, as a part of 
the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), by 
merging the Committees on Military Affairs and Naval Affairs. 
The Committees on Military Affairs and Naval Affairs were 
established in 1882. In 1885, jurisdiction over military and 
naval appropriations was taken from the Committee on 
Appropriations and given to the Committees on Military Affairs 
and Naval Affairs, respectively. This practice continued until 
July 1, 1920, when jurisdiction over all appropriations was 
again placed in the Committee on Appropriations.
    In the 93rd Congress, following a study by the House Select 
Committee on Committees, the House passed H. Res. 988, the 
Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, to be effective January 3, 
1975. As a result of those amendments, the jurisdictional areas 
of the Committee on Armed Services remained essentially 
unchanged. However, oversight functions were amended to require 
each standing committee to review and study on a continuing 
basis all matters and jurisdiction of the committee. Also, the 
Committee on Armed Services was to review and study on a 
continuing basis all laws, programs, and Government activities 
dealing with or involving international arms control and 
disarmament and the education of military dependents in school.
    The rules changes adopted by the House (H. Res. 5) on 
January 4, 1977, placed new responsibilities in the field of 
atomic energy in the Committee on Armed Services. Those 
responsibilities involved the national security aspects of 
atomic energy previously within the jurisdiction of the Joint 
Committee on Atomic Energy. Public Law 95-110, effective 
September 20, 1977, abolished the Joint Committee on Atomic 
Energy.
    With the adoption of H. Res. 658 on July 14, 1977, which 
established the House Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence, the jurisdiction of the Committee on Armed 
Service over intelligence matters was changed. That resolution 
gave the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence oversight 
responsibilities for intelligence and intelligence-related 
activities and programs of the U.S. Government. Specifically, 
the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has exclusive 
legislative jurisdiction regarding the Central Intelligence 
Agency and the director of Central Intelligence, including 
authorizations. Also, legislative jurisdiction over all 
intelligence and intelligence-related activities and programs 
was vested in the permanent select committee except that other 
committees with a jurisdictional interest may request 
consideration of any such matters. Accordingly, as a matter of 
practice, the Committee on Armed Services shared jurisdiction 
over the authorization process involving intelligence-related 
activities.
    The committee continues to have shared jurisdiction over 
military intelligence activities as set forth in rule X of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives.
    With the adoption of House rules (H. Res. 5) on January 4, 
1995, the Committee on National Security was established as the 
successor committee to the Committee on Armed Services, and was 
granted additional legislative and oversight authority over 
merchant marine academies, national security aspects of 
merchant marine policy and programs, and interoceanic canals. 
Rules for the 104th Congress also codified the existing 
jurisdiction of the committee over tactical intelligence 
matters and the intelligence related activities of the 
Department of Defense.
    On January 6, 1999, the House adopted H. Res. 5, rules for 
the 106th Congress, in which the Committee on National Security 
was redesignated as the Committee on Armed Services.
    On January 5, 2012, the House adopted H. Res. 5, rules for 
the 112th Congress, which clarified the Committee on Armed 
Services jurisdiction over Department of Defense administered 
cemeteries.

                    Constitutional Powers and Duties

    The powers and duties of Congress in relation to national 
defense matters stem from Article I, section 8 of the United 
States Constitution, which provides, among other things that 
Congress shall have power:
    To raise and support Armies;
    To provide and maintain a Navy;
    To make rules for the Government and Regulation of the land 
and naval Forces;
    To provide for calling forth the Militia;
    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the 
Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed 
in the Service of the United States;
    To exercise exclusive Legislation . . . over all Places 
purchased . . . for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, 
dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; and
    To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for 
carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers.

                      House Rules on Jurisdiction

    Rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives 
established the jurisdiction and related functions for each 
standing committee. Under the rule, all bills, resolutions, and 
other matters relating to subjects within the jurisdiction of 
any standing committee shall be referred to such committee. The 
jurisdiction of the House Committee on Armed Services, pursuant 
to clause 1(c) of rule X is as follows:
    (1) Ammunition depots; forts; arsenals; and Army, Navy, and 
Air Force reservations and establishments.
    (2) Common defense generally.
    (3) Conservation, development, and use of naval petroleum 
and oil shale reserves.
    (4) The Department of Defense generally, including the 
Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, generally.
    (5) Interoceanic canals generally, including measures 
relating to the maintenance, operation, and administration of 
interoceanic canals.
    (6) Merchant Marine Academy and State Maritime Academies.
    (7) Military applications of nuclear energy.
    (8) Tactical intelligence and intelligence-related 
activities of the Department of Defense.
    (9) National security aspects of merchant marine, including 
financial assistance for the construction and operation of 
vessels, maintenance of the U.S. shipbuilding and ship repair 
industrial base, cabotage, cargo preference, and merchant 
marine officers and seamen as these matters relate to the 
national security.
    (10) Pay, promotion, retirement, and other benefits and 
privileges of members of the Armed Forces.
    (11) Scientific research and development in support of the 
armed services.
    (12) Selective service.
    (13) Size and composition of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, 
and Air Force.
    (14) Soldiers' and sailors' homes.
    (15) Strategic and critical materials necessary for the 
common defense.
    (16) Cemeteries administered by the Department of Defense.
    In addition to its legislative jurisdiction and general 
oversight function, the Committee on Armed Services has special 
oversight functions with respect to international arms control 
and disarmament and the education of military dependents in 
schools.

           Investigative Authority and Legislative Oversight

    H. Res. 988 of the 93rd Congress, the Committee Reform 
Amendments of 1974, amended clause 1(b) of rule XI of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, to provide general authority 
for each committee to investigate matters within its 
jurisdiction. That amendment established a permanent 
investigative authority and relieved the committee of the 
former requirement of obtaining a renewal of the investigative 
authority by a House resolution at the beginning of each 
Congress. H. Res. 988 also amended rule X of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives by requiring, as previously indicated, 
that standing committees are to conduct legislative oversight 
in the area of their respective jurisdiction, and by 
establishing specific oversight functions for the Committee on 
Armed Services.
    The committee derives its authority to conduct oversight 
from, among other things, clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives (relating to general oversight 
responsibilities), clause 3(b) of rule X (relating to special 
oversight functions), and clause 1(b) of rule XI (relating to 
investigations and studies).

                            COMMITTEE RULES

    The committee held its organizational meeting on January 
24, 2019, and adopted the following rules governing rules and 
procedure for oversight hearings conducted by the full 
committee and its subcommittees. (H.A.S.C. 116-1; Committee 
Print No. 1)

                       RULE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

    (a) The Rules of the House of Representatives are the rules 
of the Committee on Armed Services (hereinafter referred to in 
these rules as the ``Committee'') and its subcommittees so far 
as applicable.
    (b) Pursuant to clause 2(a)(2) of rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, the Committee's rules shall be 
publicly available in electronic form and published in the 
Congressional Record not later than 60 days after the chair of 
the committee is elected in each odd-numbered year.

                  RULE 2. FULL COMMITTEE MEETING DATE

    (a) The Committee shall meet every Wednesday at 10:00 a.m., 
when the House of Representatives is in session, and at such 
other times as may be fixed by the Chairman of the Committee 
(hereinafter referred to as the ``Chairman''), or by written 
request of members of the Committee pursuant to clause 2(c) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives.
    (b) A Wednesday meeting of the Committee may be dispensed 
with by the Chairman, but such action may be reversed by a 
written request of a majority of the members of the Committee.

                   RULE 3. SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING DATES

    Each subcommittee is authorized to meet, hold hearings, 
receive evidence, and report to the Committee on all matters 
referred to it. Insofar as possible, meetings of the Committee 
and its subcommittees shall not conflict. A subcommittee 
chairman shall set meeting dates after consultation with the 
Chairman, other subcommittee chairmen, and the ranking minority 
member of the subcommittee with a view toward avoiding, 
whenever possible, simultaneous scheduling of Committee and 
subcommittee meetings or hearings.

   RULE 4. JURISDICTION AND MEMBERSHIP OF COMMITTEE AND SUBCOMMITTEES

(a) Jurisdiction
    (1) The Committee retains jurisdiction of all subjects 
listed in clause 1(c) and clause 3(b) of rule X of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives and retains exclusive jurisdiction 
for: defense policy generally, ongoing military operations, the 
organization and reform of the Department of Defense and the 
Department of Energy, counter-drug programs, security 
cooperation and humanitarian assistance activities (except 
special operations-related activities) of the Department of 
Defense, acquisition and industrial base policy, technology 
transfer and export controls, joint interoperability, detainee 
affairs and policy, force protection policy, and inter-agency 
reform as it pertains to the Department of Defense and the 
nuclear weapons programs of the Department of Energy. While 
subcommittees are provided jurisdictional responsibilities in 
subparagraph (a)(2) and are required to conduct oversight in 
their respective jurisdictions, pursuant to clause 2(b)(2) of 
rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee retains the right to exercise oversight and 
legislative jurisdiction over all subjects within its purview 
under rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives.
    (2) The Committee shall be organized to consist of six 
standing subcommittees with the following jurisdictions:
    Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces: Army programs 
and accounts related to aircraft, ground equipment, missiles, 
ammunition, and other procurement; Marine Corps programs and 
accounts related to ground and amphibious equipment, fighter 
aircraft, helicopters, air-launched weapons, and ammunition; 
Air Force programs and accounts related to fighter, training, 
reconnaissance and surveillance, and electronic warfare 
aircraft, helicopters, air-launched weapons, ground equipment, 
and ammunition; Navy programs and accounts related to fighter, 
training, and electronic warfare aircraft, helicopters, and 
air-launched weapons; tactical air and missile defense programs 
and accounts; chemical agent and munition destruction programs 
and accounts; and National Guard and Reserve equipment programs 
and accounts.
    Subcommittee on Military Personnel: Department of Defense 
policy and programs and accounts related to military personnel 
and their families, Reserve Component integration and 
employment, military health care, military education, dependent 
schools, POW/MIA issues, Morale, Welfare and Recreation, 
commissaries, cemeteries under the jurisdiction of the 
Department of Defense, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 
and military retirement issues.
    Subcommittee on Readiness: Department of Defense policy and 
programs and accounts related to military readiness, training, 
logistics and maintenance, military construction, organic 
industrial base, the civilian and contract workforce, 
environment, military installations and real property 
management, family housing, base realignments and closures, and 
energy.
    Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces: Navy and 
Marine Corps acquisition programs and accounts related to 
shipbuilding and conversion, reconnaissance and surveillance, 
tanker, and airlift aircraft, ship and submarine-launched 
weapons, ammunition, and other procurements; Air Force programs 
and accounts related to bomber, tanker, and airlift aircraft; 
Army programs and accounts related to waterborne vessels; and 
Maritime policy and programs and accounts under the 
jurisdiction of the Committee as delineated in paragraphs 5 and 
9 of clause 1(c) of rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives.
    Subcommittee on Strategic Forces: Department of Defense and 
Department of Energy policy related to strategic deterrence, 
strategic stability, nuclear weapons, strategic and nuclear 
arms control, nonproliferation, nuclear safety, missile 
defense, and space; Department of Defense programs and accounts 
related to nuclear weapons, strategic missiles, nuclear command 
and control systems, Department of Defense intelligence space, 
space systems and services of the military departments, and 
intermediate and long-range missile defense systems; and 
Department of Energy national security programs and accounts.
    Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and 
Capabilities: Department of Defense policy and programs and 
accounts related to military intelligence, national 
intelligence, countering weapons of mass destruction, counter-
proliferation, counter-terrorism, other sensitive military 
operations, special operations forces, cyber security, cyber 
operations, cyber forces, information technology, information 
operations, and science and technology (including defense-wide 
programs and accounts related to research, development, 
testing, and evaluation, except for those defense-wide programs 
and accounts related to research, development, testing, and 
evaluation of missile defense systems).
    (3) Definitions--For the purposes of subparagraph (a)(2):
          (A) The phrase ``programs and accounts'' means 
        acquisition and modernization programs, sustainment 
        planning during program development, and related 
        funding lines for procurement, advanced development, 
        advanced component development and prototypes, systems 
        development, sustainment planning, and demonstration.
          (B) The term ``policy'' means statutes, regulations, 
        directives, and other institutional guidance.
          (C) The phrase ``science and technology'' means 
        science and technology programs and related funding 
        lines for basic research, applied research, and non-
        acquisition program advanced development.
(b) Membership of the Subcommittees
    (1) Subcommittee memberships shall be filled in accordance 
with the rules of the majority party's caucus and the minority 
party's conference, respectively.
    (2) The Chairman of the Committee and the Ranking Minority 
Member thereof (hereinafter referred to as the ``Ranking 
Minority Member'') may sit as ex officio members of all 
subcommittees. Ex officio members shall not vote in 
subcommittee hearings or meetings or be taken into 
consideration for the purpose of determining the ratio of the 
subcommittees or establishing a quorum at subcommittee hearings 
or meetings.
    (3) A member of the Committee who is not a member of a 
particular subcommittee may sit with the subcommittee and 
participate during any of its hearings but shall not have 
authority to vote, cannot be counted for the purpose of 
achieving a quorum, and cannot raise a point of order at the 
hearing.

                RULE 5. COMMITTEE PANELS AND TASK FORCES

(a) Committee Panels
    (1) The Chairman may designate a panel of the Committee 
consisting of members of the Committee to inquire into and take 
testimony on a matter or matters that fall within the 
jurisdiction of more than one subcommittee and to report to the 
Committee.
    (2) No panel appointed by the Chairman shall continue in 
existence for more than six months after the appointment. A 
panel so appointed may, upon the expiration of six months, be 
reappointed by the Chairman for a period of time which is not 
to exceed six months.
    (3) Consistent with the party ratios established by the 
majority party, all majority members of the panels shall be 
appointed by the Chairman, and all minority members shall be 
appointed by the Ranking Minority Member. The Chairman shall 
choose one of the majority members so appointed who does not 
currently chair another subcommittee of the Committee to serve 
as chairman of the panel. The Ranking Minority Member shall 
similarly choose the ranking minority member of the panel.
    (4) No panel shall have legislative jurisdiction.
(b) Committee and Subcommittee Task Forces
    (1) The Chairman, or the chairman of a subcommittee with 
the concurrence of the Chairman, may designate a task force to 
inquire into and take testimony on a matter that falls within 
the jurisdiction of the Committee or subcommittee, 
respectively. The Chairman and the Ranking Minority Member or 
the chairman and the ranking minority member of a subcommittee 
shall each appoint an equal number of members to the task 
force. The Chairman or the chairman of a subcommittee shall 
choose one of the members so appointed, who does not currently 
chair another subcommittee of the Committee, to serve as 
chairman of the task force. The Ranking Minority Member or the 
ranking minority member of a subcommittee shall similarly 
appoint the ranking minority member of the task force.
    (2) No task force appointed by the Chairman or the chairman 
of a subcommittee shall continue in existence for more than 
three months. A task force may only be reappointed for an 
additional three months with the written concurrence of the 
Chairman and the Ranking Minority Member or the concurrence of 
the chairman and the ranking minority member of the 
subcommittee whose chairman appointed the task force.
    (3) No task force shall have legislative jurisdiction.

           RULE 6. REFERENCE AND CONSIDERATION OF LEGISLATION

    (a) The Chairman shall refer legislation and other matters 
to the appropriate subcommittee or to the full Committee.
    (b) Legislation shall be taken up for a hearing or markup 
only when called by the Chairman or the chairman of a 
subcommittee, as appropriate, or by a majority of the Committee 
or subcommittee, as appropriate.
    (c) The Chairman, with approval of a majority vote of a 
quorum of the Committee, shall have authority to discharge a 
subcommittee from consideration of any measure or matter 
referred thereto and have such measure or matter considered by 
the Committee.
    (d) Reports and recommendations of a subcommittee may not 
be considered by the Committee until after the intervention of 
three calendar days from the time the report is approved by the 
subcommittee and available to the members of the Committee, 
except that this rule may be waived by a majority vote of a 
quorum of the Committee.
    (e) The Chairman, in consultation with the Ranking Minority 
Member, shall establish criteria for recommending legislation 
and other matters to be considered by the House of 
Representatives, pursuant to clause 1 of rule XV of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives. Such criteria shall not 
conflict with the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
other applicable rules.

          RULE 7. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF HEARINGS AND MEETINGS

    (a) Pursuant to clause 2(g)(3) of rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, the Chairman, or the chairman of 
any subcommittee, panel, or task force, shall make a public 
announcement of the date, place, and subject matter of any 
hearing or meeting before that body at least one week before 
the commencement of a hearing and at least three calendar days 
(excluding Saturdays, Sundays, or legal holidays except when 
the House is in session on such a day) before the commencement 
of a meeting. However, if the Chairman, with the concurrence of 
the Ranking Minority Member, or the chairman of any 
subcommittee, panel, or task force, with the concurrence of the 
respective ranking minority member, determines that there is 
good cause to begin the hearing or meeting sooner, or if the 
Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task force so determines by 
majority vote, a quorum being present for the transaction of 
business, such chairman shall make the announcement at the 
earliest possible date. Any announcement made under this rule 
shall be promptly published in the Daily Digest, and promptly 
made publicly available in electronic form.
    (b) At least 24 hours prior to the commencement of a 
meeting for the markup of legislation, or at the time of an 
announcement under paragraph (a) made within 24 hours before 
such meeting, the Chairman, or the chairman of any 
subcommittee, panel, or task force shall cause the text of such 
measure or matter to be made publicly available in electronic 
form as provided in clause 2(g)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives.

        RULE 8. BROADCASTING OF COMMITTEE HEARINGS AND MEETINGS

    (a) Pursuant to clause 2(e)(5) of rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, the Committee shall, to the 
maximum extent practicable, provide audio and video coverage of 
each hearing or meeting for the transaction of business in a 
manner that allows the public to easily listen to and view the 
proceedings. The Committee shall maintain the recordings of 
such coverage in a manner that is easily accessible to the 
public.
    (b) Clause 4 of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives shall apply to the Committee.

            RULE 9. MEETINGS AND HEARINGS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC

    (a) Each hearing and meeting for the transaction of 
business, including the markup of legislation, conducted by the 
Committee, or any subcommittee, panel, or task force, to the 
extent that the respective body is authorized to conduct 
markups, shall be open to the public except when the Committee, 
subcommittee, panel, or task force in open session and with a 
majority being present, determines by record vote that all or 
part of the remainder of that hearing or meeting on that day 
shall be in executive session because disclosure of testimony, 
evidence, or other matters to be considered would endanger the 
national security, would compromise sensitive law enforcement 
information, or would violate any law or rule of the House of 
Representatives. Notwithstanding the requirements of the 
preceding sentence, a majority of those present, there being in 
attendance no fewer than two members of the Committee, 
subcommittee, panel, or task force may vote to close a hearing 
or meeting for the sole purpose of discussing whether testimony 
or evidence to be received would endanger the national 
security, would compromise sensitive law enforcement 
information, or would violate any law or rule of the House of 
Representatives. If the decision is to proceed in executive 
session, the vote must be by record vote and in open session, a 
majority of the Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task force 
being present.
    (b) Whenever it is asserted by a member of the Committee, 
subcommittee, panel, or task force that the evidence or 
testimony at a hearing may tend to defame, degrade, or 
incriminate any person, or it is asserted by a witness that the 
evidence or testimony that the witness would give at a hearing 
may tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate the witness, 
notwithstanding the requirements of paragraph (a) and the 
provisions of clause 2(g)(2)(A) of rule XI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives and in accordance with the provisions 
of clause 2(g)(2)(B) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives, such evidence or testimony shall be presented 
in executive session, if by a majority vote of those present, 
there being in attendance no fewer than two members of the 
Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task force, the Committee, 
subcommittee, panel, or task force determines that such 
evidence may tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate any 
person. A majority of those present, there being in attendance 
no fewer than two members of the Committee, subcommittee, 
panel, or task force may also vote to close the hearing or 
meeting for the sole purpose of discussing whether evidence or 
testimony to be received would tend to defame, degrade, or 
incriminate any person. The Committee, subcommittee, panel, or 
task force shall proceed to receive such testimony in open 
session only if the Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task 
force, a majority being present, determines that such evidence 
or testimony will not tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate 
any person.
    (c) Notwithstanding the foregoing, and with the approval of 
the Chairman, each member of the Committee may designate by 
letter to the Chairman, one member of that member's personal 
staff, and an alternate, which may include fellows, with Top 
Secret security clearance to attend hearings of the Committee, 
or that member's subcommittee(s), panel(s), or task force(s) 
(excluding briefings or meetings held under the provisions of 
committee rule 9(a)), which have been closed under the 
provisions of rule 9(a) above for national security purposes 
for the taking of testimony. The attendance of such a staff 
member or fellow at such hearings is subject to the approval of 
the Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task force as dictated 
by national security requirements at that time. The attainment 
of any required security clearances is the responsibility of 
individual members of the Committee.
    (d) Pursuant to clause 2(g)(2) of rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, no Member, Delegate, or Resident 
Commissioner may be excluded from nonparticipatory attendance 
at any hearing of the Committee or a subcommittee, unless the 
House of Representatives shall by majority vote authorize the 
Committee or subcommittee, for purposes of a particular series 
of hearings on a particular article of legislation or on a 
particular subject of investigation, to close its hearings to 
Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner by the same 
procedures designated in this rule for closing hearings to the 
public.
    (e) The Committee or the subcommittee may vote, by the same 
procedure, to meet in executive session for up to five 
additional consecutive days of hearings.

                            RULE 10. QUORUM

    (a) For purposes of taking testimony and receiving 
evidence, two members shall constitute a quorum.
    (b) One-third of the members of the Committee or 
subcommittee shall constitute a quorum for taking any action, 
with the following exceptions, in which case a majority of the 
Committee or subcommittee shall constitute a quorum:
          (1) Reporting a measure or recommendation;
          (2) Closing Committee or subcommittee meetings and 
        hearings to the public;
          (3) Authorizing the issuance of subpoenas;
          (4) Authorizing the use of executive session 
        material; and
          (5) Voting to proceed in open session after voting to 
        close to discuss whether evidence or testimony to be 
        received would tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate 
        any person.
    (c) No measure or recommendation shall be reported to the 
House of Representatives unless a majority of the Committee is 
actually present.

                     RULE 11. THE FIVE-MINUTE RULE

    (a) Subject to rule 15, the time any one member may address 
the Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task force on any 
measure or matter under consideration shall not exceed five 
minutes and then only when the member has been recognized by 
the Chairman or subcommittee chairman, as appropriate, except 
that this time limit may be exceeded by unanimous consent. Any 
member, upon request, shall be recognized for not more than 
five minutes to address the Committee or subcommittee on behalf 
of an amendment which the member has offered to any pending 
bill or resolution. The five-minute limitation shall not apply 
to the Chairman and the Ranking Minority Member or the chairman 
and the ranking minority member of a subcommittee, panel, or 
task force.
    (b)(1) Members who are present at a hearing of the 
Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task force when a hearing is 
originally convened shall be recognized by the Chairman or 
subcommittee, panel, or task force chairman, as appropriate, in 
order of seniority. Those members arriving subsequently shall 
be recognized in order of their arrival. Notwithstanding the 
foregoing, the Chairman and the Ranking Minority Member or the 
chairman and the ranking minority member of a subcommittee, 
panel, or task force, as appropriate, will take precedence upon 
their arrival. In recognizing members to question witnesses in 
this fashion, the Chairman shall take into consideration the 
ratio of the majority to minority members present and shall 
establish the order of recognition for questioning in such a 
manner as not to disadvantage the members of either party.
          (2) Pursuant to rule 4 and subject to rule 15, a 
        member of the Committee who is not a member of a 
        subcommittee, panel, or task force may be recognized by 
        a subcommittee, panel, or task force chairman in order 
        of their arrival and after all present subcommittee, 
        panel, or task force members have been recognized.
          (3) The Chairman of the Committee or the chairman of 
        a subcommittee, panel, or task force, with the 
        concurrence of the respective ranking minority member, 
        may depart with the regular order for questioning which 
        is specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this rule 
        provided that such a decision is announced prior to the 
        hearing or prior to the opening statements of the 
        witnesses and that any such departure applies equally 
        to the majority and the minority.
    (c) No person other than a Member, Delegate, or Resident 
Commissioner of Congress and committee staff may be seated in 
or behind the dais area during Committee, subcommittee, panel, 
or task force hearings and meetings.

             RULE 12. POWER TO SIT AND ACT; SUBPOENA POWER

    (a) For the purpose of carrying out any of its functions 
and duties under rules X and XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives, the Committee and any subcommittee is 
authorized (subject to subparagraph (b)(1) of this paragraph):
          (1) to sit and act at such times and places within 
        the United States, whether the House is in session, has 
        recessed, or has adjourned, and to hold hearings, and
          (2) to require by subpoena, or otherwise, the 
        attendance and testimony of such witnesses and the 
        production of such books, records, correspondence, 
        memorandums, papers and documents, including, but not 
        limited to, those in electronic form, as it considers 
        necessary.
    (b)(1) A subpoena may be authorized and issued by the 
Committee, or any subcommittee with the concurrence of the 
Chairman and after consultation with the Ranking Minority 
Member, under subparagraph (a)(2) in the conduct of any 
investigation, or series of investigations or activities, only 
when authorized by a majority of the members voting, a majority 
of the Committee or subcommittee being present. Authorized 
subpoenas shall be signed only by the Chairman, or by any 
member designated by the Committee.
    (2) Pursuant to clause 2(m) of rule XI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, compliance with any subpoena issued 
by the Committee or any subcommittee under subparagraph (a)(2) 
may be enforced only as authorized or directed by the House of 
Representatives.

                      RULE 13. WITNESS STATEMENTS

    (a) Any prepared statement to be presented by a witness to 
the Committee or a subcommittee, panel, or task force shall be 
submitted to the Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task force 
at least 48 hours in advance of presentation and shall be 
distributed to all members of the Committee, subcommittee, 
panel, or task force as soon as practicable but not less than 
24 hours in advance of presentation. A copy of any such 
prepared statement shall also be submitted to the Committee in 
electronic form. If a prepared statement contains national 
security information bearing a classification of Confidential 
or higher, the statement shall be made available in the 
Committee rooms to all members of the Committee, subcommittee, 
panel, or task force as soon as practicable but not less than 
24 hours in advance of presentation; however, no such statement 
shall be removed from the Committee offices. The requirement of 
this rule may be waived by a majority vote of the Committee, 
subcommittee, panel, or task force, a quorum being present. In 
cases where a witness does not submit a statement by the time 
required under this rule, the Chairman, with the concurrence of 
the Ranking Minority Member, or the chairman of a subcommittee, 
panel, or task force, as appropriate, with the concurrence of 
the respective ranking minority member, may elect to exclude 
the witness from the hearing.
    (b) The Committee and each subcommittee, panel, or task 
force shall require each witness who is to appear before it to 
file with the Committee in advance of his or her appearance a 
written statement of the proposed testimony and to limit the 
oral presentation at such appearance to a brief summary of the 
submitted written statement.
    (c) Pursuant to clause 2(g)(5) of rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, written witness statements, with 
appropriate redactions to protect the privacy of the witness, 
shall be made publicly available in electronic form not later 
than one day after the witness appears.

               RULE 14. ADMINISTERING OATHS TO WITNESSES

    (a) The Chairman, or any member designated by the Chairman, 
may administer oaths to any witness.
    (b) Witnesses, when sworn, shall subscribe to the following 
oath:
          ``Do you solemnly swear (or affirm) that the 
        testimony you will give before this Committee (or 
        subcommittee, panel, or task force) in the matters now 
        under consideration will be the truth, the whole truth, 
        and nothing but the truth, so help you God?''

                   RULE 15. QUESTIONING OF WITNESSES

    (a) When a witness is before the Committee or a 
subcommittee, panel, or task force, members of the Committee, 
subcommittee, panel, or task force may put questions to the 
witness only when recognized by the Chairman, subcommittee, 
panel, or task force chairman, as appropriate, for that purpose 
according to rule 11 of the Committee.
    (b) Members of the Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task 
force who so desire shall have not more than five minutes to 
question each witness or panel of witnesses, the responses of 
the witness or witnesses being included in the five-minute 
period, until such time as each member has had an opportunity 
to question each witness or panel of witnesses. Thereafter, 
additional rounds for questioning witnesses by members are 
within the discretion of the Chairman or the subcommittee, 
panel, or task force chairman, as appropriate.
    (c) Questions put to witnesses before the Committee, 
subcommittee, panel, or task force shall be pertinent to the 
measure or matter that may be before the Committee, 
subcommittee, panel, or task force for consideration.

         RULE 16. PUBLICATION OF COMMITTEE HEARINGS AND MARKUPS

    The transcripts of those hearings conducted by the 
Committee, subcommittee, panel, or task force will be published 
officially in substantially verbatim form, with the material 
requested for the record inserted at that place requested, or 
at the end of the record, as appropriate. The transcripts of 
markups conducted by the Committee or any subcommittee may be 
published officially in verbatim form. Any requests to correct 
any errors, other than those in transcription, will be appended 
to the record, and the appropriate place where the change is 
requested will be footnoted. Any transcript published under 
this rule shall include the results of record votes conducted 
in the session covered by the transcript and shall also include 
materials that have been submitted for the record and are 
covered under rule 19. The handling and safekeeping of these 
materials shall fully satisfy the requirements of rule 20. No 
transcript of an executive session conducted under rule 9 shall 
be published under this rule.

                     RULE 17. VOTING AND ROLLCALLS

    (a) Voting on a measure or matter may be by record vote, 
division vote, voice vote, or unanimous consent.
    (b) A record vote shall be ordered upon the request of one-
fifth of those members present.
    (c) No vote by any member of the Committee or a 
subcommittee with respect to any measure or matter shall be 
cast by proxy.
    (d) In the event of a vote or votes, when a member is in 
attendance at any other committee, subcommittee, or conference 
committee meeting during that time, the necessary absence of 
that member shall be so noted in the record vote record, upon 
timely notification to the Chairman by that member.
    (e) The Chairman, with the concurrence of the Ranking 
Minority Member, or the chairman of a subcommittee, as 
appropriate, with the concurrence of the respective ranking 
minority member or the most senior minority member who is 
present at the time, may elect to postpone requested record 
votes until such time or point at a markup as is mutually 
decided. When proceedings resume on a postponed question, 
notwithstanding any intervening order for the previous 
question, the underlying proposition shall remain subject to 
further debate or amendment to the same extent as when the 
question was postponed.

                       RULE 18. COMMITTEE REPORTS

    (a) If, at the time of approval of any measure or matter by 
the Committee, any member of the Committee gives timely notice 
of intention to file supplemental, minority, additional or 
dissenting views, all members shall be entitled to not less 
than two calendar days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal 
holidays except when the House is in session on such days) in 
which to file such written and signed views with the Staff 
Director of the Committee, or the Staff Director's designee. 
All such views so filed by one or more members of the Committee 
shall be included within, and shall be a part of, the report 
filed by the Committee with respect to that measure or matter.
    (b) With respect to each record vote on a motion to report 
any measure or matter, and on any amendment offered to the 
measure or matter, the total number of votes cast for and 
against, the names of those voting for and against, and a brief 
description of the question, shall be included in the Committee 
report on the measure or matter.
    (c) Not later than 24 hours after the adoption of any 
amendment to a measure or matter considered by the Committee, 
the Chairman shall cause the text of each such amendment to be 
made publicly available in electronic form as provided in 
clause 2(e)(6) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives.

           RULE 19. PUBLIC INSPECTION OF COMMITTEE ROLLCALLS

    The result of each record vote in any meeting of the 
Committee shall be made available by the Committee for 
inspection by the public at reasonable times in the offices of 
the Committee and also made publicly available in electronic 
form within 48 hours of such record vote pursuant to clause 
2(e)(1)(B)(i) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives. Information so available shall include a 
description of the amendment, motion, order, or other 
proposition and the name of each member voting for and each 
member voting against such amendment, motion, order, or 
proposition and the names of those members present but not 
voting.

     RULE 20. PROTECTION OF NATIONAL SECURITY AND OTHER INFORMATION

    (a) Except as provided in clause 2(g) of rule XI of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, all national security 
information bearing a classification of Confidential or higher 
which has been received by the Committee or a subcommittee 
shall be deemed to have been received in executive session and 
shall be given appropriate safekeeping.
    (b) The Chairman shall, with the approval of a majority of 
the Committee, establish such procedures as in his judgment may 
be necessary to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of any 
national security information that is received which is 
classified as Confidential or higher. Such procedures shall, 
however, ensure access to this information by any member of the 
Committee or any other Member, Delegate, or Resident 
Commissioner of the House of Representatives, staff of the 
Committee, or staff designated under rule 9(c) who have the 
appropriate security clearances and the need to know, who has 
requested the opportunity to review such material.
    (c) The Chairman shall, in consultation with the Ranking 
Minority Member, establish such procedures as in his judgment 
may be necessary to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of any 
proprietary information that is received by the Committee, 
subcommittee, panel, or task force. Such procedures shall be 
consistent with the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
applicable law.

                      RULE 21. COMMITTEE STAFFING

    The staffing of the Committee, the standing subcommittees, 
and any panel or task force designated by the Chairman or the 
chairmen of the subcommittees shall be subject to the Rules of 
the House of Representatives.

                       RULE 22. COMMITTEE RECORDS

    The records of the Committee at the National Archives and 
Records Administration shall be made available for public use 
in accordance with rule VII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives. The Chairman shall notify the Ranking Minority 
Member of any decision, pursuant to clause 3(b)(3) or clause 
4(b) of rule VII, to withhold a record otherwise available, and 
the matter shall be presented to the Committee for a 
determination on the written request of any member of the 
Committee.

                      RULE 23. HEARING PROCEDURES

    Clause 2(k) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives shall apply to the Committee.

                  RULE 24. COMMITTEE ACTIVITY REPORTS

    Not later than January 2nd of each odd-numbered year the 
Committee shall submit to the House a report on its activities, 
pursuant to clause 1(d) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives.

             COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                             FULL COMMITTEE

    Pursuant to H. Res. 24, H. Res. 25, H. Res. 42, H. Res. 68, 
and H. Res. 712, the following Members have served on the 
Committee on Armed Services in the 116th Congress:

 ADAM SMITH, Washington, Chairman

WILLIAM M. ``MAC'' THORNBERRY, Texas SUSAN A. DAVIS, California
JOE WILSON, South Carolina           JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island
ROB BISHOP, Utah                     RICK LARSEN, Washington
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio              JIM COOPER, Tennessee
MIKE ROGERS, Alabama                 JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas            JOHN GARAMENDI, California
DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado               JACKIE SPEIER, California
ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia          TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri             DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia                RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona
MO BROOKS, Alabama                   SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts
PAUL COOK, California\3\             SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California
BRADLEY BYRNE, Alabama               ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland, Vice 
SAM GRAVES, Missouri                 Chair
ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York          RO KHANNA, California
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee          WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts
RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana         FILEMON VELA, Texas
TRENT KELLY, Mississippi             ANDY KIM, New Jersey
MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin            KENDRA S. HORN, Oklahoma
MATT GAETZ, Florida                  GILBERT RAY CISNEROS, Jr., 
DON BACON, Nebraska                  California
JIM BANKS, Indiana                   CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania
LIZ CHENEY, Wyoming                  JASON CROW, Colorado
PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan\4\           XOCHITL TORRES SMALL, New Mexico
JACK BERGMAN, Michigan               ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan
MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida               MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey
                                     KATIE HILL, California\1\
                                     VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
                                     DEBRA A. HAALAND, New Mexico
                                     JARED GOLDEN, Maine
                                     LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts
                                     ELAINE G. LURIA, Virginia
                                     ANTHONY BRINDISI, New York\2\

----------
\1\Mrs. Hill resigned from the committee on November 3, 2019.
\2\Mr. Brindisi was elected to the committee on November 19, 2019
\3\Mr. Cook resigned from the committee on December 7, 2020.
\4\Mr. Mitchell's election to the committee was vacated on December 15, 
2020.

            SUBCOMMITTEES OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

    The following subcommittees were established at the 
committee's organizational meeting on January 24, 2019.

   Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and Capabilities

    Jurisdiction Pursuant to Committee Rule 4--Department of 
Defense policy and programs and accounts related to military 
intelligence, national intelligence, countering weapons of mass 
destruction, counter-proliferation, counter-terrorism, other 
sensitive military operations, special operations forces, cyber 
security, cyber operations, cyber forces, information 
technology, information operations, and science and technology 
(including defense-wide programs and accounts related to 
research, development, testing, and evaluation, except for 
those defense-wide programs and accounts related to research, 
development, testing, and evaluation of missile defense 
systems).

 JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island, 
             Chairman

ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York          RICK LARSEN, Washington
SAM GRAVES, Missouri                 JIM COOPER, Tennessee
RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana         TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas            ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland
AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia                RO KHANNA, California
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee          WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts
MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin            ANDY KIM, New Jersey
MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida               CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania
DON BACON, Nebraska                  JASON CROW, Colorado, Vice Chair
JIM BANKS, Indiana                   ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan
                                     LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts

                   Subcommittee on Military Personnel

    Jurisdiction Pursuant to Committee Rule 4--Department of 
Defense policy and programs and accounts related to military 
personnel and their families, Reserve Component integration and 
employment, military health care, military education, dependent 
schools, POW/MIA issues, Morale, Welfare and Recreation, 
commissaries, cemeteries under the jurisdiction of the 
Department of Defense, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 
and military retirement issues.

    JACKIE SPEIER, California, 
            Chairwoman

TRENT KELLY, Mississippi             SUSAN A. DAVIS, California
RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana         RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona
LIZ CHENEY, Wyoming                  GILBERT RAY CISNEROS, Jr., 
PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan\1\           California, Vice Chair
JACK BERGMAN, Michigan               VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
MATT GAETZ, Florida                  DEBRA A. HAALAND, New Mexico
                                     LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts
                                     ELAINE G. LURIA, Virginia

----------
\1\Mr. Mitchell's election to the committee was vacated on December 15, 
2020.

                       Subcommittee on Readiness

    Jurisdiction Pursuant to Committee Rule 4--Department of 
Defense policy and programs and accounts related to military 
readiness, training, logistics and maintenance, military 
construction, organic industrial base, the civilian and 
contract workforce, environment, military installations and 
real property management, family housing, base realignments and 
closures, and energy.

   JOHN GARAMENDI, California, 
             Chairman

DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado               TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia                ANDY KIM, New Jersey, Vice Chair
JOE WILSON, South Carolina           KENDRA S. HORN, Oklahoma
ROB BISHOP, Utah                     CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania
MIKE ROGERS, Alabama                 JASON CROW, Colorado
MO BROOKS, Alabama                   XOCHITL TORRES SMALL, New Mexico
ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York          ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan
JACK BERGMAN, Michigan               VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
                                     DEBRA A. HAALAND, New Mexico

             Subcommittee on Seapower And Projection Forces

    Jurisdiction Pursuant to Committee Rule 4--Navy and Marine 
Corps acquisition programs and accounts related to shipbuilding 
and conversion, reconnaissance and surveillance, tanker, and 
airlift aircraft, ship and submarine-launched weapons, 
ammunition, and other procurements; Air Force programs and 
accounts related to bomber, tanker, and airlift aircraft; Army 
programs and accounts related to waterborne vessels; and 
Maritime policy and programs and accounts under the 
jurisdiction of the Committee as delineated in paragraphs 5 and 
9 of clause 1(c) of rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives.

    JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut, 
             Chairman

ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia          JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island
K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas            JIM COOPER, Tennessee
MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin            DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
JACK BERGMAN, Michigan               SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts
MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida               FILEMON VELA, Texas
VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri             GILBERT RAY CISNEROS, Jr., 
PAUL COOK, California\3\             California
BRADLEY BYRNE, Alabama               MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey
TRENT KELLY, Mississippi             KATIE HILL, California\1\
                                     JARED GOLDEN, Maine
                                     ELAINE LURIA, Virginia, Vice Chair
                                     ANTHONY BRINDISI, New York\2\

----------
\1\Mrs. Hill resigned from the committee on November 3, 2019.
\2\Mr. Brindisi was assigned to the subcommittee on November 19, 2019.
\3\ Mr. Cook resigned from the committee on December 7, 2020.

                    Subcommittee on Strategic Forces

    Jurisdiction Pursuant to Committee Rule 4--Department of 
Defense and Department of Energy policy related to strategic 
deterrence, strategic stability, nuclear weapons, strategic and 
nuclear arms control, nonproliferation, nuclear safety, missile 
defense, and space; Department of Defense programs and accounts 
related to nuclear weapons, strategic missiles, nuclear command 
and control systems, Department of Defense intelligence space, 
space systems and services of the military departments, and 
intermediate and long-range missile defense systems; and 
Department of Energy national security programs and accounts.

  JIM COOPER, Tennessee, Chairman

MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio              SUSAN A. DAVIS, California
JOE WILSON, South Carolina           RICK LARSEN, Washington
ROB BISHOP, Utah                     JOHN GARAMENDI, California
MIKE ROGERS, Alabama                 JACKIE SPEIER, California
MO BROOKS, Alabama                   SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts
BRADLEY BYRNE, Alabama               SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee          RO KHANNA, California
LIZ CHENEY, Wyoming                  WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts
                                     KENDRA S. HORN, Oklahoma, Vice 
                                     Chair

              Subcommittee on Tactical Air And Land Forces

    Jurisdiction Pursuant to Committee Rule 4--Army programs 
and accounts related to aircraft, ground equipment, missiles, 
ammunition, and other procurement; Marine Corps programs and 
accounts related to ground and amphibious equipment, fighter 
aircraft, helicopters, air-launched weapons, and ammunition; 
Air Force programs and accounts related to fighter, training, 
reconnaissance and surveillance, and electronic warfare 
aircraft, helicopters, air-launched weapons, ground equipment, 
and ammunition; Navy programs and accounts related to fighter, 
training, and electronic warfare aircraft, helicopters, and 
air-launched weapons; tactical air and missile defense programs 
and accounts; chemical agent and munition destruction programs 
and accounts; and National Guard and Reserve equipment programs 
and accounts.

   DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey, 
             Chairman

VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri             JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island
PAUL COOK, California\3\             JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
MATT GAETZ, Florida                  RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona
DON BACON, Nebraska                  SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California
JIM BANKS, Indiana                   ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland
PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan\4\           FILEMON VELA, Texas
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio              XOCHITL TORRES SMALL, New Mexico, 
DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado               Vice Chair
ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia          MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey
                                     KATIE HILL, California\1\
                                     JARED GOLDEN, Maine
                                     ANTHONY BRINDISI. New York\2\

----------
\1\Mrs. Hill resigned from the committee on November 3, 2019.
\2\Mr. Brindisi was assigned to the subcommittee on November 19, 2019.
\3\Mr. Cook resigned from the committee on December 7, 2020.
\4\Mr. Mitchell's election to the committee was vacated on December 15, 
2020.

             TASK FORCE OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

    The Future of Defense Task Force was appointed on October 
16, 2019, and was reappointed on January 15, 2020.

                      Future of Defense Task Force

    Jurisdiction pursuant to Committee Rule 5--The Future of 
Defense Task Force was chartered to review U.S. defense assets 
and capabilities and assess the state of the national security 
innovation base to meet emerging threats.
JIM BANKS, Indiana, Chair            SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts, Chair
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee          SUSAN DAVIS, California
PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan              CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania
MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida               ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan

                            COMMITTEE STAFF

    By committee resolution adopted at the organizational 
meeting on January 24, 2019, or by authority of the chairman, 
the following persons have been appointed to the staff of the 
committee during the 116th Congress:

  Paul Arcangeli, Staff Director
  Daniel Sennott, Minority Staff 
             Director
   Jen Stewart, Minority Staff 
  Director (resigned January 12, 
               2020)
    Douglas Bush, Deputy Staff 
             Director
Betty B. Gray, Executive Assistant
  John F. Sullivan, Professional 
Staff Member (resigned February 2, 
               2019)
     Jesse D. Tolleson, Jr., 
     Professional Staff Member
  Rebecca A. Ross, Professional 
           Staff Member
Heath R. Bope, Professional Staff 
              Member
David Sienicki, Professional Staff 
              Member
Zach Steacy, Director, Legislative 
            Operations
  Everett Coleman, Professional 
           Staff Member
 Craig Greene, Professional Staff 
              Member
  Phil MacNaughton, Professional 
           Staff Member
  Jack Schuler, Budget Director 
    (resigned January 17, 2019)
 John N. Johnson, Staff Assistant 
    (resigned February 1, 2020)
   William S. Johnson, General 
              Counsel
Peter Villano, Professional Staff 
  Member (resigned March 1, 2020)
      Leonor Tomero, Counsel
Brian Garrett, Professional Staff 
              Member
  Claude Chafin, Communications 
 Director (resigned December 11, 
               2020)
 Katie Thompson, Security Manager
  David Giachetti, Professional 
           Staff Member
 Lindsay Kavanaugh, Professional 
 Staff Member (resigned September 
             6, 2019)
Mark Morehouse, Professional Staff 
              Member
  Katy Quinn, Professional Staff 
              Member
    Barron YoungSmith, Counsel/
      Communications Director
 Brian Greer, Professional Staff 
Member (resigned December 1, 2019)
 Jason Schmid, Professional Staff 
              Member
  Megan Handal, Clerk (resigned 
        November 30, 2019)
      Danielle Steitz, Clerk
Thomas Hawley, Professional Staff 
  Member (resigned June 10, 2019)
Sarah Mineiro, Professional Staff 
  Member (resigned April 1, 2020)
   Shenita White, Office Manager
   Hannah Scheenstra, Executive 
Assistant (resigned April 9, 2019)
  Glen Diehl, Professional Staff 
              Member
Maria Vastola, Professional Staff 
              Member
   Kim Lehn, Professional Staff 
              Member
  Jamie Jackson, Deputy General 
              Counsel
 Stephanie Halcrow, Professional 
           Staff Member
Eric Snelgrove, Professional Staff 
              Member
  Justin Lynch, Clerk (resigned 
          April 26, 2019)
      Caroline Kehrli, Clerk
       Zachary Taylor, Clerk
William Sutey, Professional Staff 
              Member
 Elizabeth Griffin, Professional 
           Staff Member
  Halimah Najieb-Locke, Counsel 
      (resigned June 4, 2020)
 Michael Hermann, Budget Director
Carla Zeppieri, Professional Staff 
              Member
 Sapna Sharma, Professional Staff 
              Member
 Kelly Goggin, Professional Staff 
              Member
Melanie Harris, Professional Staff 
              Member
 William T. Johnson, Professional 
           Staff Member
 Chidi Blyden, Professional Staff 
Member (appointed January 7, 2019)
  Grant Schneider, Professional 
Staff Member (appointed January 7, 
               2019)
Joshua Stiefel, Professional Staff 
  Member (appointed January 10, 
               2019)
Jonathan Lord, Professional Staff 
  Member (appointed January 14, 
               2019)
Jeanine Womble, Professional Staff 
  Member (appointed January 14, 
               2019)
  Jessica Carroll, Professional 
 Staff Member (appointed January 
             21, 2019)
 Matt Rhoades, Professional Staff 
  Member (appointed January 21, 
               2019)
 Bess Dopkeen, Professional Staff 
  Member (appointed January 28, 
               2019)
  Sean Falvey, Clerk (appointed 
         February 1, 2019)
  Jonathan Pawlow, Professional 
 Staff Member (appointed February 
1, 2019, resigned January 2, 2020)
 Laura Rauch, Professional Staff 
  Member (appointed February 25, 
               2019)
  Monica Matoush, Communications 
 Director (appointed February 27, 
               2019)
Shannon Green, Professional Staff 
 Member (appointed April 15, 2019)
   Caleb Randall-Bodman, Deputy 
Communications Director (appointed 
          April 22, 2019)
  Alonzo Webb, Clerk (appointed 
          April 23, 2019)
Alexis Hasty, Executive Assistant 
      (appointed May 1, 2019)
 John Muller, Professional Staff 
  Member (appointed May 9, 2019)
 Emma Morrison, Clerk (appointed 
           June 3, 2019)
Troy Nienberg, Professional Staff 
Member (appointed January 6, 2020)
  Sidney Faix, Clerk (appointed 
         January 13, 2020)
   Natalie De Benedetti, Clerk 
   (appointed January 13, 2020)
James Vallario, Professional Staff 
  Member (appointed February 21, 
               2020)
 Naajidah Khan, Clerk (appointed 
          April 15, 2020)
 Paul Golden, Professional Staff 
 Member (appointed April 20, 2020)
Hannah Kaufman, Professional Staff 
 Member (appointed April 26, 2020)
Karen Thornton, Professional Staff 
 Member (appointed June 29, 2020)
 Jeff Bozman, Professional Staff 
 Member (appointed July 13, 2020)

                    COMMITTEE MEETINGS AND HEARINGS

    A total of 227 meetings and hearings have been held by the 
Committee on Armed Services, its subcommittees, and task force 
during the 116th Congress. A breakdown of the meetings and 
hearings follows:
FULL COMMITTEE...................................................    65
SUBCOMMITTEES:
    Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and 
      Capabilities...............................................    32
    Subcommittee on Military Personnel...........................    22
    Subcommittee on Readiness....................................    25
    Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces...............    21
    Subcommittee on Strategic Forces.............................    23
    Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces.................    20
TASK FORCE:
    Future of Defense Task Force.................................    19

                         LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES

                              PUBLIC LAWS


     Public Law 116-11 (S. 252)--A Bill to Authorize the Honorary 
 Appointment of Robert J. Dole to the Grade of Colonel in the Regular 
                                  Army

    S. 252, ``A bill to authorize the honorary appointment of 
Robert J. Dole to the grade of colonel in the regular Army'', 
was introduced in the Senate by Senator Pat Roberts on January 
29, 2019, and referred to the Senate Committee on Armed 
Services. On March 4, 2019, the Senate Committee on Armed 
Services was discharged from S. 252 and it passed the Senate 
without amendment by unanimous consent. On March 5, 2019, S. 
252 was received in the House and referred to the Committee on 
Armed Services, and subsequently to the Subcommittee on 
Military Personnel. On March 26, 2019, Representative Gilbert 
R. Cisneros, Jr. asked unanimous consent that the Committee on 
Armed Services be discharged from further consideration of S. 
252 and for its immediate consideration in the House. There was 
no objection to the request, and S. 252 was passed in the House 
by unanimous consent. On April 6, 2019, S. 252 was signed by 
the President and became Public Law 116-11.

  Public Law 116-92 (S. 1790)--National Defense Authorization Act For 
                            Fiscal Year 2020

    S. 1790 was reported to the Senate as an original measure 
by Chairman James M. Inhofe on June 11, 2019. The Senate began 
consideration of S. 1790 on June 24, 2019. It passed the Senate 
with an amendment by yea-nay vote, 86-8 (Record Vote Number: 
188) on June 27, 2019. On July 2, 2019, S. 1790 was sent to the 
House and held at the desk.
    On September 17, 2019, Chairman Adam Smith (WA) asked 
unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table, the bill S. 
1790, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House; to 
strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu 
thereof the provisions of H.R. 2500 as passed by the House; to 
pass the Senate bill, as amended; and to insist on the House 
amendment thereto and request a conference with the Senate 
thereon. The request was agreed to without objection. On 
September 18, 2019, the Senate disagreed to the House amendment 
to the Senate bill and agreed to the request for conference.
    On December 9, 2019, the conference report to accompany S. 
1790 (H. Rept. 116-333) was filed in the House. On December 11, 
2019, the conference report was agreed to in the House by the 
yeas and nays, 377-48 (Roll no. 627). On December 17, 2019, the 
conference report was agreed to in Senate, 86-8 (Record Vote 
Number: 400). The President signed the legislation on December 
20, 2019, and it became Public Law 116-92.
    Public Law 116-92 did the following: (1) authorized 
appropriations for fiscal year 2020 for procurement and for 
research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E); (2) 
authorized appropriations for fiscal year 2020 for operation 
and maintenance (O&M) and for working capital funds; (3) 
authorized for fiscal year 2020 the personnel strength for each 
Active Duty component of the military departments, and the 
personnel strength for the Selected Reserve for each Reserve 
Component of the Armed Forces; (4) modified various elements of 
compensation for military personnel and imposed certain 
requirements and limitations on personnel actions in the 
defense establishment; (5) authorized appropriations for fiscal 
year 2020 for military construction and family housing; (6) 
authorized appropriations for Overseas Contingency Operations; 
(7) authorized appropriations for fiscal year 2020 for the 
Department of Energy national security programs; and (8) 
authorized appropriations for fiscal year 2020 for the Maritime 
Administration.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 
is a key mechanism through which Congress fulfills one of its 
primary responsibilities as mandated in Article I, Section 8, 
of the Constitution of the United States, which grants Congress 
the power to provide for the common defense, to raise and 
support an Army, to provide and maintain a Navy, and to make 
rules for the Government and regulation of the land and naval 
forces. Rule X of the House of Representatives provides the 
House Committee on Armed Services with jurisdiction over the 
Department of Defense generally and over the military 
application of nuclear energy. The bill includes the large 
majority of the findings and recommendations resulting from its 
oversight activities, conducted through hearings, briefings, 
and roundtable discussions with Department of Defense and 
Department of Energy civilian and military officials, 
intelligence analysts, outside experts, and industry 
representatives, and informed by the experience gained over the 
previous decades of the committee's existence.

     Public Law 116-210 (H.R. 8276)--To Authorize the President to 
  Posthumously Award the Medal of Honor to Alwyn C. Cashe for Acts of 
                  Valor during Operation Iraqi Freedom

    H.R. 8276, ``To authorize the President to posthumously 
award the Medal of Honor to Alwyn C. Cashe for acts of valor 
during Operation Iraqi Freedom'', was introduced on September 
16, 2020, by Representative Stephanie N. Murphy and was 
referred to the Committee on Armed Services. On September 22, 
2020, Representative Kendra S. Horn asked unanimous consent 
that the Committee on Armed Services be discharged from further 
consideration of the bill and for its immediate consideration 
in the House. There was no objection to the request, and H.R. 
8276 was passed in the House by unanimous consent. On September 
23, 2020, H.R. 8276 was received in the Senate and read twice. 
On November 10, 2020, it was passed in the Senate by unanimous 
consent. On December 4, 2020, H.R. 8276 was signed by the 
President and became Public Law 116-210.

                 LEGISLATION PASSED THE HOUSE OVER VETO


 H.R. 6395--William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization 
                        Act For Fiscal Year 2021

    On March 26, 2020, H.R. 6395, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, was introduced by 
Chairman Adam Smith and referred to the Committee on Armed 
Services. On July 1, 2020, the Committee on Armed Services held 
a markup session to consider H.R. 6395. The committee ordered 
the bill H.R. 6395, as amended, favorably reported to the House 
of Representatives by a recorded vote of 56-0, a quorum being 
present. The short title of the bill, as reported to the House, 
was amended to the ``William M. (Mac) Thornberry National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021''. The bill 
passed the House, as amended, on July 21, 2020, by recorded 
vote, 295-125 (Roll no. 152). On August 5, 2020, the bill was 
received in the Senate, read twice, and placed on Senate 
Legislative Calendar under General Orders Calendar No. 505.
    On November 16, 2020, the measure was laid before the 
Senate by unanimous consent and the Senate passed H.R. 6395 
with an amendment in the nature of a substitute by a voice 
vote.
    On November 18, 2020, Chairman Smith requested that the 
House disagree to the Senate amendment and request a conference 
with the Senate by unanimous consent. On December 2, 2020, the 
Senate insisted on its amendment and agreed to the request for 
a conference by unanimous consent. On December 3, 2020, the 
conference report to accompany H.R. 6395 (H. Rept. 116-617) was 
filed in the House. On December 8, 2020, the conference report 
was agreed to in the House by the yeas and nays, 335-78-1 (Roll 
no. 238). On December 11, 2020, the conference report was 
agreed to in the Senate by a yea-nay vote, 84-13 (Record Vote 
Number: 264). The bill was presented to the President on 
December 11, 2020. The bill was vetoed by the President on 
December 23, 2020. On December 28, 2020, the House considered 
the veto message of the President. The House passed H.R. 6395 
over veto by the yeas and nays (2/3 required), 322-87 (Roll no. 
253).
    The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 does the following: (1) 
authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2021 for procurement 
and for research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E); 
(2) authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2021 for operation 
and maintenance (O&M) and for working capital funds; (3) 
authorize for fiscal year 2021 the personnel strength for each 
Active Duty component of the military departments, and the 
personnel strength for the Selected Reserve for each Reserve 
Component of the Armed Forces; (4) modify various elements of 
compensation for military personnel and imposed certain 
requirements and limitations on personnel actions in the 
defense establishment; (5) authorize appropriations for fiscal 
year 2021 for military construction and family housing; (6) 
authorize appropriations for Overseas Contingency Operations; 
(7) authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2021 for the 
Department of Energy national security programs; and (8) 
authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2021 for the Maritime 
Administration.
    The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 is a key mechanism 
through which Congress fulfills one of its primary 
responsibilities as mandated in Article I, Section 8, of the 
Constitution of the United States, which grants Congress the 
power to provide for the common defense, to raise and support 
an Army, to provide and maintain a Navy, and to make rules for 
the Government and regulation of the land and naval forces. 
Rule X of the House of Representatives provides the House 
Committee on Armed Services with jurisdiction over the 
Department of Defense generally and over the military 
application of nuclear energy. The bill includes the large 
majority of the findings and recommendations resulting from its 
oversight activities, conducted through hearings, briefings, 
and roundtable discussions with Department of Defense and 
Department of Energy civilian and military officials, 
intelligence analysts, outside experts, and industry 
representatives, and informed by the experience gained over the 
previous decades of the committee's existence.

           LEGISLATION PASSED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES


   H.R. 2500--National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020

    On May 2, 2019, H.R. 2500, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, was introduced by 
Chairman Adam Smith and referred to the Committee on Armed 
Services. On June 12, 2019, the Committee on Armed Services 
held a markup session to consider H.R. 2500. The committee 
ordered the bill H.R. 2500, as amended, favorably reported to 
the House of Representatives by a recorded vote of 33-24, a 
quorum being present. The bill passed the House, as amended, on 
July 12, 2019, by recorded vote, 220-197 (Roll no. 473). On 
August 11, 2019, the bill was received in the Senate, read 
twice, and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General 
Orders Calendar No. 512. For further action on the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, please see 
Public Law 116-92.

  H. RES. 124--Expressing Opposition to Banning Service in the Armed 
                Forces by Openly Transgender Individuals

    H. Res. 124, ``Expressing opposition to banning service in 
the Armed Forces by openly transgender individuals'', was 
introduced on February 11, 2019, by Representative Joseph P. 
Kennedy, III and was referred to the Committee on Armed 
Services, and subsequently to the Subcommittee on Military 
Personnel. Pursuant to H. Res. 252, H. Res. 124 was considered 
in the House under a closed rule on March 28, 2019. H. Res. 252 
provided for 1 hour of debate on H. Res. 124 equally divided 
and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on Armed Services. On March 28, 2019, H. Res. 124 was 
agreed to in the House by the yeas and nays: 238-185-1 (Roll 
no. 135).

     H. RES. 413--Expressing the Immense Gratitude of the House of 
Representatives for the Acts of Heroism, Valor, and Sacrifices made by 
 the Members of the United States Armed Forces and Allied Armed Forces 
 who Participated in the June 6, 1944, Amphibious Landing at Normandy, 
   France, and Commending those Individuals for their Leadership and 
    Bravery in an Operation that Helped bring an End to World War II

    H. Res. 413, ``Expressing the immense gratitude of the 
House of Representatives for the acts of heroism, valor, and 
sacrifices made by the members of the United States Armed 
Forces and allied armed forces who participated in the June 6, 
1944, amphibious landing at Normandy, France, and commending 
those individuals for their leadership and bravery in an 
operation that helped bring an end to World War II'', was 
introduced on May 30, 2019, by Representative William R. 
Keating and was referred to the Committee on Armed Services, 
and in addition to the Committees on Foreign Affairs, and 
Veterans' Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined 
by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 
provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 
concerned. On May 31, 2019, the resolution was subsequently 
referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel. On June 4, 
2019, Representative Keating asked unanimous consent that the 
Committee on Armed Services be discharged from further 
consideration of the resolution and for its immediate 
consideration in the House. There was no objection to the 
request, and H. Res. 413 was agreed to in the House by 
unanimous consent.

                          OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES

                                OVERVIEW

    Pursuant to clause 1(d) of rule XI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, described below are actions taken and 
recommendations made with respect to specific areas and 
subjects that were identified in the oversight plan for special 
attention during the 116th Congress, as well as additional 
oversight activities not explicitly enumerated by the oversight 
plan.

                             POLICY ISSUES

  National Defense Strategy, National Military Strategy, and Related 
                         Defense Policy Issues

    During the 116th Congress, the committee continued to focus 
on the readiness, capability, and capacity of the U.S. Armed 
Forces, support for ongoing military operations, and the 
Department of Defense. The committee fulfilled its 
constitutional responsibilities primarily by legislating the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public 
Law 116-92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021.
    The committee oversaw Department of Defense efforts to 
implement the National Defense Strategy and the National 
Military Strategy during the 116th Congress. In doing so, the 
committee examined the broad strategic framework, including: 
strategic objectives; relevant departmental policies, 
initiatives, and doctrines; force structures; joint operational 
concepts; various organizational matters; roles and missions; 
training and exercises; education; investments; the research 
and development of new technologies; modernization efforts; 
logistics; facilities and supporting infrastructure; and 
industrial base matters; and the committee provided the 
resources necessary to support strategic requirements.
    The committee also continued to oversee: ongoing military 
operations; reassurance and deterrence activities; and 
Department of Defense investments in capabilities, and 
infrastructure to address current and emergent challenges. The 
committee informed its legislative efforts and conducted 
oversight through hearings and briefings; engagements with 
defense leaders, military commanders, diplomats, academics, and 
private sector experts; and congressional delegation visits to 
military installations and U.S. forces serving abroad.

                               Deterrence

    During the 116th Congress, the committee continued its 
oversight to ensure that U.S. defense posture and policy are 
structured to effectively deter actors posing strategic 
challenges to the United States, its allies, and partners. That 
included the ability of the United States, in concert with 
allies and partners, to deter adversaries militarily and to 
counter efforts to weaken our shared values, undermine our 
systems of government, threaten international norms, and 
disrupt the cohesion of our alliances and partnerships. To that 
end, the committee conducted oversight, gathered information, 
and legislated on issues critical to deterrence such as U.S. 
defense capabilities, resources, and posture; implementation of 
the National Defense Strategy; competition for influence and 
hybrid warfare; security cooperation and assistance; and 
adaptation in a dynamic and complex national security 
environment.
    In particular, the committee's activities in the 116th 
Congress recognized the essential role that U.S. alliances and 
partnerships play in maintaining global security and advancing 
U.S. national security objectives. For that reason, in the 
course of its legislative and oversight activities, the 
committee pursued efforts to strengthen U.S. alliances and 
partnerships, paid careful attention to the state of U.S. 
relationships, and sought to respond deliberately and 
effectively to adversary efforts to disrupt them.

                                 Russia

    Russia continues to maintain an aggressive global influence 
campaign, particularly evident in Eastern Europe, the Middle 
East, and Central Asia, but with far-reaching impacts 
worldwide. Russian military activity and its employment of 
unconventional and conventional tactics, including efforts to 
disrupt the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), malign 
activities in Afghanistan, ongoing aggression in Ukraine, 
increased naval activity, and increased engagement in locations 
as disparate as Africa, Central America, and the arctic, were 
important areas of concern for the committee in the 116th 
Congress. The committee's oversight has concentrated on the 
U.S. military capabilities, capacity, posture, and readiness 
needed to effectively maintain U.S. alliances and to counter 
and deter Russia.
    The European Deterrence Initiative (EDI), and the resources 
associated with it, was a significant area of oversight for the 
committee. The committee sought to ensure that the initiative 
was appropriately resourced and implemented while taking 
substantial steps to strengthen transparency, planning, and 
congressional oversight of the initiative. The committee also 
maintained oversight of Department resources and tools 
allocated to ensure that U.S. force posture in Europe is 
appropriate and continued to work on building the capacity of 
Ukraine and other NATO allies and partners to deter and defend 
against Russian aggression.
    During the 116th Congress, the committee received several 
intelligence and policy briefings on Russia's military programs 
and activities, its naval activity, its engagement in locations 
such as Africa, Central America, and the arctic, and Russia's 
global influence operations, including those aimed at 
disrupting elections, democratic institutions, and military 
partnerships and alliances, as well as its ongoing aggression 
in Ukraine. On March 13, 2019, the committee conducted a 
hearing titled ``National Security Challenges and U.S. Military 
Activities in Europe'' to inform the committee regarding the 
fiscal year 2020 budget request as it relates to the European 
theater. On May 9, 2019, members of the committee received a 
related briefing. On May 15, 2019, the committee received a 
briefing on ``Russian Federation's Election Interference 
Efforts and U.S. Responses.'' On February 11, 2020, the 
committee held a hearing with outside experts on ``The 
Department of Defense's Role in Long-Term Major State 
Competition,'' including competition with Russia. On February 
27, 2020, members of the committee received a related briefing. 
On July 9, 2020, the committee received a briefing on media 
reports of a Russian bounty program on U.S. and Coalition 
service members in Afghanistan. On July 23, 2020, members of 
the committee received a briefing on proposed force structure 
changes in the European theater. On September 23, 2020, the 
committee held a hearing with outside experts on ``The Role of 
Allies and Partners in U.S. Military Strategy and Operations,'' 
discussing the role of alliances in partnerships in deterring 
Russia. On September 30, 2020, the committee held a hearing 
regarding ``U.S. Defense Posture Changes in the European 
Theater,'' assessing announced changes to U.S. military posture 
in Europe. On October 1, 2020, the committee received a 
briefing on ``Foreign Election Interference Efforts'' with 
relevant experts. Members and staff also traveled to the U.S. 
European Command area of operations on multiple occasions to 
review and assess operations and activities, including those 
related to Russia. These congressional and staff delegations 
were preceded by operational and intelligence oversight 
briefings to members and staff by senior officials from the 
Department of Defense, the Department of State, and the 
intelligence community.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 
(Public Law 116-92) contained several provisions to bolster the 
deterrence and defense capabilities of the United States and 
strengthen collective deterrence with allies and partners in 
Europe, to include fully funding the EDI request at $5.7 
billion and authorizing an additional $734.3 million in funds 
for activities and capabilities supporting European deterrence, 
as well as $300.0 million for security assistance, equipment, 
and training to Ukrainian forces under the Ukraine Security 
Assistance Initiative. Further, Public Law 116-92 established 
new oversight, planning, and transparency requirements for EDI, 
including a requirement to display enhanced fidelity in the 
contents of the EDI to Congress during budget submissions, 
annual five-year planning for each EDI submission, and 
subsequent yearly reporting to Congress on how EDI funds have 
been used. Public Law 116-92 also expressed the sense of 
Congress in strong support of the NATO alliance and prohibited 
the use of funds to suspend, terminate, or file notice of 
withdrawal from the North Atlantic Treaty until December 31, 
2020. Public Law 116-92 also limited military cooperation 
between the United States and Russia, prohibited funds for 
activities recognizing the sovereignty of the Russian 
Federation over Crimea, extended other security cooperation 
authorities, and mandated sanctions related to construction of 
the Nord Stream II pipeline.
    The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) contained 
several provisions to strengthen deterrence measures, defense 
capabilities, and enhance collective deterrence with U.S. 
partners and allies in Europe, including fully funding the EDI 
request at $4.5 billion and authorizing additional funds for 
activities and capabilities supporting European deterrence, as 
well as $250.0 million for security assistance, equipment, and 
training to Ukrainian forces under the Ukraine Security 
Assistance Initiative. Further, the FY21 NDAA expressed the 
sense of Congress in support of NATO and limited a reduction in 
the number of U.S. forces stationed in Germany below 34,500 
until 120 days after the Secretary of Defense submits an 
assessment to Congress regarding costs, plans, and impacts 
related to a reduction. The FY21 NDAA also limited military 
cooperation between the United States and Russia, prohibited 
funds for activities recognizing the sovereignty of the Russian 
Federation over Crimea, expanded and extended other security 
cooperation authorities, required an assessment of U.S. 
military posture in Southeastern Europe, extended the annual 
Russia Military Power Report, established mandatory sanctions 
on Turkey for its acquisition of the Russian S-400 air missile 
defense system as required by CAATSA, and expanded sanctions 
related to construction of the Nord Stream II pipeline.

                                  Iran

    Iran continued to project malign influence throughout the 
Middle East region by threatening freedom of navigation in 
critical waterways, supporting terrorist organizations and 
proxy militias, illicit cyber operations, developing and 
proliferating ballistic missiles, and threatening to resume 
development of nuclear weapons following the United States' 
withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
    During the 116th Congress, the committee received briefings 
on Iran's military capabilities and malign activities 
throughout the region. The committee conducted oversight of the 
Department's efforts to deter Iran's destabilizing activities 
throughout the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility. 
Additionally, the committee conducted oversight of U.S. Central 
Command's force posture, readiness, and activities with respect 
to Iran and other regional threats. On December 13, 2019, the 
committee received a briefing on the Department's policies 
toward Iran and Saudi Arabia. On January 29, 2020, the 
committee received a briefing on the Department's policies 
toward Iran. On March 7, 2019, the committee held a hearing on 
U.S. national security challenges in the Middle East and Africa 
titled ``National Security Challenges and U.S. Military 
Activities in the Greater Middle East and Africa''. On March 
10, 2020, the committee held a hearing on the same subject 
titled ``National Security Challenges and U.S. Military 
Activities in the Greater Middle East and Africa''. Members and 
staff traveled to the U.S. Central Command area of operations 
on multiple occasions to review and assess operations and 
activities, including those related to Iran. These 
congressional and staff delegations were preceded by 
operational and intelligence oversight briefings to members and 
staff by senior officials from the Department of Defense, the 
Department of State, and the intelligence community. Finally, 
the committee received numerous staff-level briefings on 
Department of Defense programs and activities related to Iran.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 
(Public Law 116-92) contained provisions that required a report 
studying the effect of lifting the United Nations arms embargo 
on Iran, and a report on Iranian activities related to nuclear 
proliferation. The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY 21 NDAA) contains a 
provision requiring activity and budget information on 
Operation Spartan Shield, a U.S. Central Command operation that 
includes some Iran deterrence activities. In the conference 
report accompanying the FY 21 NDAA, the conferees required a 
report examining the threat posed by Iran-backed militias in 
Iraq to Iraq and U.S. forces.

                     The People's Republic of China

    The People's Republic of China continues its efforts to 
assert influence, modernize its military, and take steps that 
erode security norms, increasing the risk of conflict, 
particularly in the South and East China Seas. The committee 
continued to conduct oversight of the Department's response to 
China's efforts to extend its military reach and invest in its 
military forces. At the same time, the committee also continued 
to conduct oversight of the Department's military posture, 
force structure, and force readiness efforts, and plans to 
enhance capabilities, forward presence, posture, and training 
and exercises to deter and counter acts of aggression and 
protect vital U.S. and ally and partner interests.
    During the 116th Congress, the committee received briefings 
on China's military strategy and capabilities, and influence 
operations, including those aimed at disrupting elections, 
democratic institutions, and military alliances and 
partnerships, as well as U.S. military posture, readiness, and 
partnership initiatives to deter such activities. On March 12, 
2019, the committee received a briefing on China's military 
power and U.S. military activities in the Indo-Pacific. On 
March 27, 2019, the committee held a hearing titled ``National 
Security Challenges and U.S. Military Activities in the Indo-
Pacific.'' On January 15, 2020, the committee held a hearing 
with outside experts on ``DOD's Role in Competition with 
China.'' On February 11, 2020, the committee held a hearing 
with outside experts on ``The Department of Defense's Role in 
Long-Term Major State Competition,'' including competition with 
China. On May 13, 2020, the committee held a briefing via 
conference call on national security challenges in the U.S. 
Indo-Pacific Command Area of Operations. On September 9, 2020, 
the committee held a hearing with outside experts on ``The Role 
of Allies and Partners in U.S. Military Strategy and 
Operations,'' discussing the role of alliances in partnerships 
in deterring China. Members and staff traveled to the U.S. 
Indo-Pacific Command area of operations on multiple occasions 
to review and assess operations and activities, including those 
related to China. These congressional and staff delegations 
were preceded by operational and intelligence oversight 
briefings to members and staff by senior officials from the 
Department of Defense, the Department of State, and the 
intelligence community.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 
(Public Law 116-92) contained several provisions to bolster the 
capacity and defense capabilities of the United States and 
partners and allies in the Indo-Pacific. Public Law 116-92 
required an assessment from the Commander of U.S. Indo-Pacific 
Command on the resource requirements to implement the National 
Defense Strategy in the region, modified the annual report on 
military and security development involving the People's 
Republic of China, and modified and expanding the Maritime 
Security Initiative to include twelve additional nations.
    The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) contained 
several provisions to strengthen deterrence measures, defense 
capabilities, and enhance collective deterrence with U.S. 
partners and allies in the Indo-Pacific. The FY 21 NDAA 
established a Pacific Deterrence Initiative to enhance the U.S. 
deterrence and defense posture in the Indo-Pacific region, 
assure allies and partners of an enduring U.S. commitment to 
the Indo-Pacific, and enhance Congress's ability to conduct 
oversight on U.S. military activities in the region. The 
Initiative authorized $2.2 billion in activities for Fiscal 
Year 2021. Further, the FY21 NDAA reinforced the United States 
commitment to a rules-based international order by modifying 
and extending the Department of Defense Freedom of Navigation 
Report and authorized the establishment of a Movement 
Coordination Center Pacific to synchronize lift capabilities of 
partner nations in the Indo-Pacific. The FY21 NDAA also 
expanded prohibitions on the U.S. defense supply chain, and 
required an assessment of the National Cyber Strategy to deter 
China from engaging in industrial espionage and cyber theft.

               The Democratic People's Republic of Korea

    The Democratic People's Republic of Korea continues to pose 
a threat to the Korean Peninsula, the United States, and U.S. 
forces, allies, and partners in East Asia. While North Korea 
has not conducted a nuclear test since 2017, North Korea 
advanced its ballistic missile program by conducting multiple 
tests in 2019 and 2020. The committee continued to oversee the 
Department of Defense's efforts to implement a range of 
posture, force structure, and force readiness initiatives; 
infrastructure and force realignments, including U.S.-Republic 
of Korea Special Measures Agreements consultations; and 
bilateral and multilateral training and exercises.
    During the 116th Congress, the committee received briefings 
on the security threats posed by North Korea, as well as U.S. 
military posture, readiness, and partnership initiatives to 
deter such activities. On February 13, 2019, the committee 
received a briefing on North Korea and U.S. military readiness 
on the Korean Peninsula. On March 27, 2019, held a hearing 
titled ``National Security Challenges and U.S. Military 
Activities in the Indo-Pacific'', including challenges posed by 
North Korea. On January 28, 2020, the committee held a hearing, 
``XXX,'' to receive a security update on the Korean Peninsula. 
On May 20, 2020, the committee held a briefing via conference 
call on national security challenges on the Korean Peninsula. 
On September 9, 2020, the committee held a hearing with outside 
experts on ``The Role of Allies and Partners in U.S. Military 
Strategy and Operations,'' discussing the role of alliances in 
partnerships, including those deterring North Korea. Members 
and staff traveled to the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command area of 
operations on multiple occasions to review and assess 
operations and activities, including those related to North 
Korea. These congressional and staff delegations were preceded 
by operational and intelligence oversight briefings to members 
and staff by senior officials from the Department of Defense, 
the Department of State, and the intelligence community.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 
(Public Law 116-92) contained several provisions to strengthen 
deterrence measures, partnerships and collective deterrence 
against threats posed by North Korea. Public Law 116-92 
prohibited the use of funds to reduce the number of active duty 
U.S. forces in South Korea below 28,500 until 90 days after the 
Secretary of Defense certifies that such a reduction is in the 
national security interest of the United States, will not 
significant undermine the security interest of allies in the 
region, and that the Secretary has appropriately consulted with 
U.S. allies, including South Korea and Japan. Further, Public 
Law 116-92 required the Comptroller General to report on the 
direct, indirect, and burden-sharing contributions of South 
Korea and Japan. Public Law 116-92 also imposed secondary-
banking sanctions and primary trade-based sanctions on North 
Korea and foreign persons involved with North Korea, and 
increased congressional oversight on enforcement of sanctions 
and North Korean sanctions evasion efforts.
    The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) contained 
several provisions to strengthen deterrence measures and 
enhance collective deterrence with U.S. partners and allies in 
East Asia. The FY21 NDAA established a Pacific Deterrence 
Initiative to reassure U.S. allies and partners of an enduring 
commitment to the Indo-Pacific and to enhance Congress' ability 
to conduct oversight on U.S. military activities in the region. 
The Initiative authorized $2.2 billion in activities for Fiscal 
Year 2021. Further, the FY21 NDAA also prohibited the use of 
funds to reduce the number of active duty U.S. forces in South 
Korea below 28,500 until 90 days after the Secretary of Defense 
certifies that such a reduction is in the national security 
interest of the United States, will not significant undermine 
the security interest of allies in the region, and that the 
Secretary has appropriately consulted with U.S. allies, 
including South Korea and Japan.

                      Strategic Deterrence Issues

    The committee also conducted oversight of issues related to 
strategic deterrence. With regard to nuclear deterrence, the 
committee conducted oversight of nuclear deterrence policy and 
posture. This oversight included a full committee hearing on 
``Outside Perspectives on Nuclear Deterrence'' on March 6, 
2019. This oversight included examining the role of nuclear 
weapons and options for nuclear deterrence; options to reduce 
the risk of miscalculation that could lead to nuclear war in a 
crisis and reduce the risk of a nuclear arms race or a lowered 
threshold to nuclear weapons use; and options to maintain 
credible nuclear extended deterrence. In order to understand 
the threat environment driving U.S. modernization efforts, the 
committee also conducted several classified briefings on the 
nuclear weapons programs of several foreign countries.

                          Countering Terrorism

    Countering terrorism remains a central focus and mission of 
the Department of Defense. U.S. Armed Forces have deployed 
around the globe to confront al-Qaida, the Islamic State of 
Iraq and Syria (ISIS), and other, associated terrorist groups. 
While these terrorist groups have been degraded, some have 
continued to present a threat to the United States.
    During the 116th Congress, the committee continued its 
oversight efforts to ensure that the posture and policies of 
the Department of Defense are properly structured, resourced, 
and aligned to effectively counter terrorist and violent 
extremist organizations that threaten the United States, its 
allies, and partners. This included examining the planning for 
and execution of counterterrorism operations, security 
cooperation to strengthen the counterterrorism capabilities and 
practices of partners and allies, and detention policy related 
to counterterrorism.
    The committee received briefings on a range of threats to 
U.S. equities and the Department's activities and capabilities 
related to combatting terrorism, deterring threats, and 
countering extremism. Further, on February 6, 2019, the 
committee held a hearing on the Department's approach to 
counterterrorism titled ``Evaluation of the Department of 
Defense's Counterterrorism Approach''. In regions, like Africa, 
the committee examined our commitment to our partners support 
efforts to bolster our partners' capacity to disrupt violent 
extremist organizations and, on March 7, 2019, and March 10, 
2020, the committee received testimony on efforts to address 
security threats in the USAFRICOM theater during hearings 
titled ``National Security Challenges and U.S. Military 
Activities in the Greater Middle East and Africa.''
    Members and staff traveled to various combatant command 
areas of operations to review and assess operations and 
activities, including those related to counterterrorism. These 
congressional and staff delegations were preceded by 
operational and intelligence oversight briefings to members and 
staff by senior officials from the Department of Defense, the 
Department of State, and the intelligence community. Finally, 
the committee received numerous staff-level briefings on 
Department of Defense programs and activities related to 
counterterrorism activities and authorities.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 
(Public Law 116-92) prohibited the Department from knowingly 
providing weapons and support to several named terrorist 
groups. The committee continued to conduct oversight of the 
Department's authority to provide support to foreign forces, 
irregular forces, groups, or individuals engaged in supporting 
ongoing military operations to combat terrorism. In the 
conference report accompanying the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116-333), the 
conferees required a report from the Department examining the 
relationship between Hizballah and the Lebanese Armed Forces.
    The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) would 
prohibit the Department from knowingly providing weapons and 
support to several named terrorist groups. It would modify and 
extend the authority to support border security operations of 
certain foreign countries.
    Further, the committee continued its oversight of detainee 
policy, including detainees held at the United States Naval 
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (GTMO), as well as detainees held 
in areas of operations.
    With respect to detainees held at GTMO, the committee 
continued to conduct oversight regarding detention policies and 
practices, as well as the application of the Military 
Commissions Act (Public Law 109-366; Public Law 111-84). The 
committee conducted travel to GTMO. The committee also received 
numerous staff briefings regarding conditions at GTMO, 
including briefings related to medical care and the COVID-19 
pandemic. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) extended until December 31, 2020, 
prohibitions on the transfer of GTMO detainees to the United 
States, the construction or modification of facilities in the 
United States to house GTMO detainees, closure or 
relinquishment of U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay and the 
transfer of GTMO detainees to Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen. 
Public Law 116-92 also established a Chief Medical Officer to 
oversee health care decisions at GTMO. The FY21 NDAA would 
further extend the prohibitions related to detainee transfers, 
construction, and relinquishment of U.S. Naval Station 
Guantanamo Bay until December 31, 2021.
Operation Freedom's Sentinel
    The committee continued its robust oversight of the U.S. 
military effort in Afghanistan with a focus on the 
Administration's South Asia Strategy, the ability to measure 
progress on U.S. objectives in Afghanistan and the region, the 
Agreement for Bringing Peace to Afghanistan, and reductions of 
military personnel from Afghanistan. The committee extended its 
related oversight activities on the U.S.-led Operation 
Freedom's Sentinel counterterrorism mission and the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization Resolute Support Mission (NATO-
RSM) to train, advise, and assist the Afghan National Defense 
and Security Forces (ANDSF). Additionally, the committee 
examined the regional security environment focusing on 
Pakistan, other neighboring countries, and the international 
community. Specifically, the committee scrutinized the 
Department of Defense's activities to deny safe havens for the 
Taliban, al-Qaida, the Haqqani Network, the Islamic State of 
Iraq and Syria-Khorasan, and other extremist organizations; 
support for the Government of Afghanistan's security efforts; 
NATO and other troop contributing countries' support for NATO-
RSM; and assessments of Russian influence and its possible 
impacts on Afghanistan's security.
    During both sessions of the 116th Congress, the committee 
held numerous events related to the U.S. military mission in 
Afghanistan. At hearings on March 7, 2019, and March 10, 2020, 
titled ``National Security Challenges and U.S. Military 
Activities in the Greater Middle East and Africa'', the 
committee received testimony about the U.S. military mission in 
Afghanistan. The committee also received a briefing on the U.S. 
military mission in Afghanistan, the implications for the South 
Asia Strategy, and the way ahead. On April 23, 2020, the 
committee conducted a briefing for members and staff entitled, 
``Update on the U.S. military mission in Afghanistan and the 
status of the U.S. Agreement to bring peace to Afghanistan,'' 
with officials from the Department of Defense and Department of 
State. The committee also held a briefing on media reports of a 
Russian bounty program on U.S. and Coalition service members in 
Afghanistan, following reports that Russia provided financial 
incentives to the Taliban to target U.S. and Coalition service 
members in Afghanistan. The committee also held a hearing on 
November 20, 2020, with non-governmental witnesses on the 
situation in Afghanistan, U.S. policy and military strategy, 
and the implications of the peace process on Afghanistan and 
U.S. involvement there. Officials from the Department of 
Defense, Department of State, and the intelligence community 
provided numerous additional briefings to committee members and 
staff. Additionally, committee members and staff traveled to 
Afghanistan and the region on multiple occasions to meet with 
U.S., Coalition, and Afghan officials, service members, and 
regional civilian and military leaders.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 
(Public Law 116-92) continued the authority of the Afghan 
Security Forces Fund to support the ANDSF, including the Afghan 
Air Force and the Afghan Special Operations Forces. It also 
modified the Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009 (8 U.S.C. 
1101) to increase the number of authorized visas for Afghans 
who supported U.S. operations by 4,000 and returned primary 
applicant eligibly criteria for the visas to those specified in 
the original 2009 law.
    The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) continues to 
authorize the Afghan Security Forces Fund to support the ANDSF. 
The FY21 NDAA also includes further oversight of the Intra-
Afghan Negotiations by requiring the Secretary of State, in 
consultation with the Secretary of Defense, to submit materials 
relevant to the ``Agreement for Bringing Peace to 
Afghanistan,'' as well as any subsequent agreements. The FY21 
NDAA would also extend existing authorities and would modify 
certain Department of Defense and Department of State reporting 
requirements to improve congressional oversight of programs and 
activities in Afghanistan. The FY21 NDAA also requires a 
detailed budgetary breakdown of Operation Freedom's Sentinel 
costs in Afghanistan and limits the use of funds to reduce the 
military personnel in Afghanistan to less than 2,000 without 
first submitting a report to Congress.
Pakistan
    The committee recognizes that Pakistan remains an 
important, albeit imperfect, counterterrorism partner to the 
United States. The committee continued to conduct oversight on 
the broad range of security issues involving Pakistan, 
including the security of Pakistan's nuclear weapons, 
Pakistan's on-going and future nuclear weapon projects, 
regional tensions with India, and the positive role Pakistan 
has played in the recent Intra-Afghan Negotiations. Moreover, 
the committee evaluated the terrorist activity emanating from 
the border area between Pakistan and Afghanistan and conducted 
oversight of the Department of Defense's efforts to combat the 
threat.
    During both sessions of the 116th Congress, events related 
to the U.S. military mission in Afghanistan involved 
discussions about Pakistan. These events updated the committee 
on Pakistan, its positive role in the Afghan peace process and 
the security situation within the country.
Operation Inherent Resolve
    As part of Operation Inherent Resolve, U.S. and coalition 
forces continue to advise, train, and equip our partners 
against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). The 
committee recognizes that the security landscape in Iraq and 
Syria continues to be complex.
    During the 116th Congress, the committee conducted 
oversight to assess the sufficiency of authorities, resources, 
equipment, basing, and personnel to support the Operation 
Inherent Resolve mission and policy objectives. The committee 
conducted oversight of the Counter-ISIS Train and Equip 
programs and their effectiveness, monitored the stability of 
the countries in the region and capability of ISIS, and oversaw 
the authorities and resources provided to address these 
challenges. The committee examined the presence and influence 
exerted by other actors in Syria, particularly Russia, Iran, 
and Turkey, and the implications for U.S. objectives regarding 
ISIS and regional security and stability.
    During the 116th Congress, the committee held hearings on 
Operation Inherent Resolve and the Department of Defense's 
efforts to work with regional partners to address ISIS. On 
March 7, 2019, the committee received testimony on national 
security challenges and U.S. military activities in the Middle 
East and Africa in a hearing titled ``National Security 
Challenges and U.S. Military Activities in the Greater Middle 
East and Africa''. On December 11, 2019, the committee received 
testimony on U.S. policy in Syria and the broader region in a 
hearing titled ``U.S. Policy in Syria and the Broader Region''. 
On March 10, 2020, the committee received testimony on national 
security challenges and U.S. military activities in the Middle 
East and Africa in a hearing titled ``National Security 
Challenges and U.S. Military Activities in the Greater Middle 
East and Africa''. In addition, the committee regularly 
received briefings from Department of Defense, Department of 
State, and intelligence community officials regarding Operation 
Inherent Resolve and security threats related to the region.
    Members and staff traveled to the U.S. Central Command area 
of operations to review and assess operations and activities, 
including those related to Operation Inherent Resolve. These 
congressional and staff delegations were preceded by 
operational and intelligence oversight briefings to members and 
staff by senior officials from the Department of Defense, the 
Department of State, and the intelligence community. Finally, 
the committee received numerous staff-level briefings on 
Department of Defense programs and activities related to 
Operation Inherent Resolve.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 
(Public Law 116-92) extended and modified the authority, and 
authorized the appropriation of funds, to support the Iraqi 
security forces and vetted Syrian groups and individuals in the 
fight against ISIS. It modified and extended the authorities of 
the Office of Security Cooperation-Iraq (OSC-I) to support 
operations and activities. It included the CAESAR Syria 
Sanctions, which targeted the Assad regime's military. In the 
conference report accompanying the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116-333), the 
conferees expressed support for the Ministry of Peshmerga 
forces of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq.
    The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) extends and 
modifies the authority, and would authorize the appropriation 
of funds, to support the Iraqi security forces and vetted 
Syrian groups and individuals in the fight against ISIS. It 
would modify and extend the authorities of OSC-I to support 
operations and activities. In the conference report 
accompanying the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (H. Rept. 116-617), the 
conferees required a report from the Department on the threat 
posed by Iran-backed militias in Iraq to Iraq and U.S. military 
forces.

                       Nuclear Non-Proliferation

    The committee continued to monitor the National Nuclear 
Security Administration Defense Nuclear Non-proliferation 
activities. The threat of nuclear weapons-grade material, 
technology, and know-how remains a threat to the United States, 
particularly in light of new technological developments that 
may complicate the cost and the ability to detect such 
activity. The spread of nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons-
usable materials remain a grave threat to the United States, 
and as such, the committee authorized increased funding for 
Defense Nuclear Non-proliferation programs in both the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021. Consistent with its 
oversight plan for the 116th Congress, the committee supported 
leveraging new technologies and opportunities, and included a 
provision in Public Law 116-92 requiring a National Academy of 
Sciences review of U.S. capabilities for detection, 
verification, and monitoring of nuclear weapons and fissile 
material, and recommendations for improving these capabilities.

        Emerging Threats, Security Cooperation, and Other Issues

    The United States faces a complex array of threats to 
national security. State and non-state actors are increasingly 
leveraging opportunities to pose new and evolving threats, 
particularly in the realm of space, cyberspace, proliferation 
of weapons of mass destruction, high performance computing, and 
other emerging and disruptive technologies. Furthermore, 
threats to national security are no longer isolated to state or 
non-state actors. Infectious disease outbreaks and the extreme 
weather events associated with a changing climate threaten 
security and stability around the globe and have significance 
for U.S. national security as well as military operations. 
Partners and allies remain an integral part of addressing U.S. 
national security challenges. During the 116th Congress, the 
committee conducted oversight of numerous cross-cutting 
Department of Defense activities central to addressing these 
emerging threats. Further, the committee conducted oversight of 
security cooperation and other efforts to strengthen 
relationships with partners and allies.
Emerging Threats
    During the 116th Congress, the committee conducted 
oversight of numerous cross-cutting Department of Defense 
activities central to addressing these emerging and unforeseen 
threats. Elsewhere in this report is further discussion of such 
activities conducted by the Subcommittee on Intelligence and 
Emerging Threats and Capabilities.
    The committee conducted numerous briefings with the 
Department to assess the response to the pandemic. In 
particular, the committee established a series of briefings 
with senior leaders in the Department and the services to 
coordinate the response to the new stresses and demands that 
the pandemic placed on the Department, including the defense 
industrial base and its supply chains, and to examine policy 
options for defending against potential vulnerabilities. 
Through these briefings, the committee sought timely, detailed 
information on the activity of the Department and its 
contractors, including the Department's acquisition-related 
support to other Federal departments and agencies. They also 
informed the committee's legislative efforts, including to 
align strategically the tools of industrial policy--including 
most prominently the Defense Production Act--with the needs of 
the warfighters and the supporting establishment.
    The committee also continues to recognize national security 
threats facing the country stem from grey zone activities 
(e.g., disinformation campaigns and fake news, cyber espionage, 
and election meddling and political interference) that occur 
below the level of armed conflict and yet can yield significant 
damage. The committee is concerned that the Department is not 
fully synchronized in its efforts to confront these threats. To 
that end, the committee conducted a series of meetings and 
briefings, some of which were classified, on topics ranging 
from technologies to counter unmanned aircraft systems to the 
sensitive issue of elecromagnetic spectrum management to a 
series of technical briefings on election security.
Security Cooperation
    The committee conducted oversight of security cooperation, 
building partner capacity programs, and examined the importance 
of partners and allies in the 116th Congress. The committee 
focused on efforts to build partner capacity and strong 
partnerships as a means to help deter malign influence by China 
and Russia and further U.S. national security objectives. 
Activities included oversight of the Department's activities in 
theaters where U.S. presence and security assistance helps 
counter investments by China and Russia. On September 23, 2020, 
the committee held a hearing entitled, ``The Role of Allies and 
Partners in U.S. Military Strategy and Operations,'' which 
examined the network of alliances and partnerships related to 
defense and opportunities to strengthen security relationships. 
In support of our partnerships, the committee also conducted 
oversight visits to countries such as Tunisia, Niger, and Mali 
where security partnerships and presence can help promote 
stability and combat extremist threats from ISIS and al-Qaida. 
In the conference report accompanying the William M. (Mac) 
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2021 (H. Rept. 116-617), the conferees required a report that 
would identify opportunities to increase security partnerships 
with African countries.
    Further, the committee continues to monitor and evaluate 
the implementation of comprehensive reforms to security 
cooperation provisions made during the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to 
ensure that they are sufficient to meet requirements, properly 
executed, and consistent with national security objectives. 
Members conducted oversight visits to countries in the regions 
to assess the sufficiency of resources available in these 
regions to help better inform the Department's allocation of 
resources to key partners and allies.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 
(Public Law 116-92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 
contained multiple provisions to adjust security cooperation 
authorities to evolving requirements and enhance congressional 
oversight of such authorities.
Other Issues
    Additionally, during the 116th Congress emphasized the need 
for whole of government approaches and partner adherence to 
shared democratic values and human rights. The committee also 
received briefings and reports on the Department's assistance 
provided to countries' participating in humanitarian relief 
efforts for Venezuela. In the conference report accompanying 
the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (H. Rept. 116-617), the conferees 
noted the importance of a sustained commitment to cooperative 
efforts, protection of civilians and adherence to human rights 
in this region by providing enhanced oversight on equipment 
certification and requiring a review of the sufficiency of 
resources to the Human Rights Office at Southern Command. In H. 
Rept. 116-617, the conferees encouraged the Department to 
continue to prevent and respond to civilian harm in the Sahel.
    During a February 26, 2020, hearing entitled, ``The Fiscal 
Year 2021 National Defense Authorization Budget Request from 
the Department of Defense'' the committee examined challenges 
to resources, force protection and posture and was briefed on 
the Department's review of the combatant commands and plans to 
reposition troops on the continent and the merger between US 
Army Africa and US Army Europe.
    The committee also examined illicit trafficking and 
transnational organized crime issues globally, particularly 
counterdrug efforts in Central and South America. The committee 
conducted hearings on military activities in the SOUTHCOM area 
of responsibility and received briefings from staff. The 
committee held a hearing on March 11, 2020, titled ``National 
Security Challenges and U.S. Military activity in North and 
South America.'' Other oversight activities such as travel 
ensured that the committee understood instability in the 
Northern Triangle and the threats to the region and their 
impact on the homeland.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 
(Public Law 116-92) also prohibited in-flight refueling to non-
U.S. aircraft engaged in hostilities in the civil war in Yemen. 
It also required a report from the Department examining the 
impact of Saudi-led coalition airstrikes on civilian casualties 
in Yemen. The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 includes provisions that 
requires reports from the Department and from the Government 
Accountability Office examining the impact of U.S. security 
assistance to the Saudi-led coalition in its conflict in Yemen 
against the Houthis. It would also include a statement of 
policy on Yemen.

        Organization and Management of the Department of Defense

    During the 116th Congress, the committee oversaw the 
organization and management of the Department of Defense, and 
it legislated substantial organizational changes through the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public 
Law 116-92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021. Prominent 
organizational changes included: the establishment of the 
United States Space Force as a separate armed force within the 
Department of the Air Force; the establishment of a Chief 
Diversity Officer within the Department of Defense; adjustments 
to the position of Chief Information Officer of the Department 
of Defense; the establishment of an Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Industrial Base Policy; the establishment of an 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and 
Environment; and the establishment of Assistant Secretaries for 
Energy, Installations, and Environment in each of the 
Departments of the Army, the Navy and the Air Force; and the 
disestablishment of the position of Chief Management Officer of 
the Department of Defense.

                            Homeland Defense

    During the 116th Congress, the committee continued its 
oversight of the missions and capabilities of U.S. Northern 
Command and the Department of Defense's Homeland Defense and 
Global Security directorate. This section covers integration of 
response planning and exercises, as well as requests for 
support from other departments and agencies, Defense Support of 
Civil Authorities, as well as the Department's integration and 
support to domestic crises response. Elsewhere, the activities 
report covers other aspects of homeland defense such as cyber 
operations, Cooperative Threat Reduction, nuclear issues, and 
intermediate and long-range missile defense systems.
    During the 116th Congress, the committee conducted 
oversight and received hearings and briefings on a range of 
topics focused on homeland defense issues, particularly on the 
Department of Defense's support to the Department of Homeland 
Security at the southern land border of the United States, 
COVID-19 pandemic support, and support to civilian law 
enforcement.
Support to the Southern Border
    During both sessions of the 116th Congress, the committee 
received numerous briefings on the mission, scope, authorities, 
duration, efficacy, and cost of U.S. border support operations 
from Department of Defense officials. On January 29, 2019, the 
committee held a hearing entitled, ``Department of Defense's 
Support to the Southern Border.'' On May 1, 2019, and March 11, 
2020, the committee held hearings titled ``National Security 
Challenges and U.S. Military Activity in North and South 
America'' to inform the committee regarding the fiscal year 
budget request as it relates to Northern Command and to the 
Department of Defense's support to the Department of Homeland 
Security at the southern border. Members and staff also 
traveled to the southern border of the United States on 
multiple occasions to review and assess Department of Defense 
operations and activities.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 
(Public Law 116-92) contained a provision that directed the 
Secretary of Defense to transmit requests for assistance 
received from the Department of Homeland Security or the 
Department of Health and Human Services electronically no later 
than 7 calendar days after receiving those requests as well as 
the Secretary's response to any such request to the committee. 
This has provided Congress greater oversight into what support 
requests the Department of Defense is receiving as well as 
which ones they support and how they will provide that support.
    The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) contained a 
provision that would modify and expand section 1059 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public 
Law 114-92) to provide more detailed information on military 
support to Department of Homeland Security along the southern 
border. The modification would require the Department of 
Defense to ensure that support to the border will not affect 
military readiness and would modify the reporting requirement 
to include a description of the assistance, the units (Active 
Duty and National Guard) that provide the assistance, the 
length of military deployments, the mission of these personnel 
by location, and the financial cost of the support.
COVID-19 Pandemic
    During the second session of the 116th Congress, the 
committee received regular briefings on how the Department of 
Defense is providing force protection during the COVID-19 
pandemic, and received updates on COVID-19 testing, research, 
and vaccine development; the COVID-19 pandemic response from 
the Department of Navy; and how Department of Defense is 
leveraging the Defense Production Act and supporting the 
Defense Industrial Base during COVID-19. The committee also 
received a briefing from the National Center for Medical 
Intelligence on COVID-19. On June 10, 2020, the committee held 
a hearing entitled ``Department of Defense COVID-19 Response to 
Defense Industrial Base Challenges.'' The Subcommittee on 
Military Personnel also held briefings with subject matter 
experts in infectious disease and global health to discuss 
military Force Health Protection related to COVID-19 on May 21, 
2020, and the progress of the COVID-19 Task Force on September 
11, 2020. These events were essential for the committee to 
better understand the origins of the pandemic, the pandemic's 
effect on the U.S. military and the military industrial base, 
as well as the Department's role in Operation Warp Speed.
    The FY21 NDAA contained a variety of provisions that would 
authorize funding to strengthen Department of Defense and the 
country's ability to respond to a potential COVID-19 resurgence 
and other infectious diseases in the future.
Support to Civilian Law Enforcement
    During the second session of the 116th Congress, the 
committee received several briefings and testimony from the 
Department of Defense on its support of civilian law 
enforcement's civil unrest activities. The committee received 
testimony from Department of Defense on July 9, 2020, at a 
hearing entitled, ``Department of Defense Authorities and Roles 
Related to Civilian Law Enforcement.'' These events provided 
the committee a better understanding of the Department of 
Defense's support to civil law enforcement, existing 
authorities, and limitations.
    The FY21 NDAA contained a provision that would require 
active duty, National Guard, and Federal law enforcement 
personnel who are providing support to Federal authorities in 
response to a civil disturbance to display visibly: (1) the 
individual's name or other identifier unique to that 
individual; and (2) the name of the Federal law enforcement 
agency, Armed Force, or other organization of which such 
individual is a member. This provides for greater transparency 
and understanding when military personnel are used in support 
of civil authorities.

                              Acquisition

    In the 116th Congress, the committee continued its ongoing 
effort to improve the agility of the Department of Defense 
acquisition system and the environment driving acquisition 
choices in the Department, industry, and Congress. Through its 
oversight function, the committee continued to monitor the 
efforts of the Department, and particularly the Under Secretary 
of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, to implement recent 
statutory changes and recommendations of commissioned reports. 
The committee placed a priority on accountability and integrity 
in contracting. In developing policy, the committee continued 
to solicit input from industry, academia, the Department, and 
other stakeholders.
    The committee conducted events to receive testimony from 
key leaders and experts. Committee staff travelled to discuss 
key issues with partners and allies and also participated in 
events for members of government, industry, academia, and 
investment communities, including a discussion platform for 
fast-paced technology.
    In response to the pandemic, the committee also established 
recurring weekly staff briefings by Department senior leaders 
on the response to the public health crisis to ensure the 
appropriate, effective, and efficient use of the Department's 
significant financial resources and contracting flexibilities 
provided in the Families First Coronavirus Relief Act and the 
Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act 
(Public Law 116-136). Further, on June 10, 2020, the committee 
held a hearing entitled ``DOD COVID-19 Response to Defense 
Industrial Base Challenges,'' which discussed the Department's 
efforts in ramping up production capacity of key public health 
needs pursuant to Defense Production Act authority, while 
expanding the defense industrial base's (DIB) capabilities and 
ensuring the health and security of companies in the DIB. The 
testimony also highlighted the Department's significant role in 
providing acquisition expertise to other federal agencies 
tasked with major pandemic-related acquisition projects. The 
committee also received a briefing on September 11, 2020, 
providing an update on defense industrial policy efforts to 
maintain a supply chain for medical supplies and to shore up 
firms in the DIB.
Acquisition Policy and Issues
    Consistent with its oversight plan for the 116th Congress, 
the committee expanded its efforts to improve the agility of 
the Department's acquisition system. Through legislation and 
oversight, the committee monitored and guided the efforts of 
the Department, and the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Sustainment, to execute its responsibilities to 
deliver effective, reliable, and affordable solutions to the 
warfighters. Beginning in early 2020, the committee applied 
these efforts with particular vigor in response to the 
coronavirus pandemic. The committee supported the Department's 
rapid response to acquisition issues and needs that the 
pandemic presented, enabling the Under Secretary for 
Acquisition and Sustainment to surge acquisition resources and 
expertise to other Government agencies, while simultaneously 
protecting the health and security of the DIB.
    The committee also emphasized the importance of 
accountability and integrity in the contracting process. 
Reports of misbehavior by some contractors underscored the 
value of transparency in the data used to determine fair and 
reasonable prices for goods and services. Transparency, coupled 
with rigorous oversight, preserves the ability of the 
Government to negotiate effectively. The committee worked to 
equip the Department with contracting tools and legal 
authorities, and encouraged the Department to deploy those 
tools and authorities, to ensure that contractors meet high 
standards of ethics and responsibility.
    The committee took action to enable the Defense acquisition 
system to respond quickly to emerging and potential threats 
from adversaries. The committee's careful approach to the 
requirements, acquisition, budget, and oversight processes 
emphasized that investments in innovation must be paired with 
broader support for sustainment activities. The committee 
supported multiple initiatives for innovative approaches to 
acquisition and modernization while also pressing the 
Department to adopt a more systematic, strategic approach to 
sustainment, to ensure that both aspects of the Acquisition and 
Sustainment enterprise receive appropriate attention.
    Industrial base resiliency and supply chain security are 
critical to the Department's ability to accomplish its 
missions. Accordingly, the committee took legislative action to 
improve the Department's ability to assess and mitigate risks 
to its supply chains by: modernizing risk assessment and 
mitigation; strengthening and prioritizing efforts to address 
key industrial base vulnerabilities; collaborating effectively 
with allies and partners; improving insight into and mitigation 
of risks presented by foreign ownership, control, and influence 
of contractors; enhancing transparency of beneficial ownership 
of contractors; reducing reliance on potentially vulnerable 
sources of strategic and critical materials; and expanding 
incentives for trusted sources of semiconductors and other 
critical microelectronics. In its oversight capacity, the 
committee ensured that the Department implemented a careful, 
risk-based approach to implementing the prohibition on certain 
telecommunications equipment, consistent with section 889 of 
the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-292).
    The committee incorporated several provisions in the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public 
Law 116-92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) 
aimed at improving efficiency and effectiveness in the 
acquisition process. Some provisions of note in Public Law 116-
92 and the FY21 NDAA include:
    (1) Investing in the Workforce: The committee made 
significant progress in strengthening the acquisition 
workforce. Public Law 116-92 required the Department to 
redesign the Acquisition Workforce certification, education, 
and career fields by leveraging nationally and internationally 
recognized standards. It also established a Defense Civilian 
Training Corps to address critical skill gaps in the 
Department's civilian workforce. It further directed the 
Department to establish extramural research activities focused 
on innovative acquisition processes to leverage expertise 
outside of the Department, in order to provide academic 
analyses and policy alternatives for consideration by the 
Department and Congress.
    (2) Streamlining Acquisition Processes: To ensure the 
integrity of the defense industrial supply base and improve 
risk mitigation, including improving processes and procedures 
for assessing and mitigating risks related to foreign 
ownership, control or influence, Public Law 116-92 directed the 
Department to streamline and digitize its acquisition processes 
and reformed acquisition policies with an increased emphasis on 
the software and personnel required to make acquisition 
efficient and cost-effective. Exclusive attention to cost, 
schedule, and performance of major defense acquisition programs 
and other development programs obscures myriad other risks in 
programs, large and small, any one of which could be single 
points of failure for successful acquisitions. The FY21 NDAA 
requires Service Acquisition Executives, who play important 
roles as portfolio managers and in executing programs, to 
report to Congress about lessons learned in the implementation 
of the Adaptive Acquisition Framework, including ``middle 
tier'' acquisition authority. To achieve a careful balance 
between flexible acquisition processes and oversight, the FY21 
NDAA also adds a congressional notification requirement after a 
program using rapid prototyping and/or rapid fielding under 
``middle tier'' of acquisition authority is terminated. Given 
the role that the Service Acquisition Executives play in 
portfolio and program management, this legislation would 
leverage their authority and accountability to improve overall 
acquisition policy. Furthermore, the FY21 NDAA enhances 
authorities for acquisition of space systems for the United 
States Space Force and requires DOD to report to the committee 
on the use of such authorities to ensure transparency and 
accountability.
    (3) Increasing Transparency and Integrity: Public Law 116-
92 empowered contracting officers to obtain cost or pricing 
data needed to stop future price gouging by defense contractors 
with sole-source contracts. The FY21 NDAA would require 
disclosure of beneficial ownership in the database used by 
federal agency contract and grant officers for contractor 
responsibility determinations and clarify whistleblower rights 
by requiring Department of Defense contractors to inform their 
employees that internal confidentiality agreements do not 
prohibit the employees from lawfully reporting fraud waste or 
abuse. Public Law 116-92 also placed increased focus on the 
integrity of the defense industrial base, by directing 
attention to contractor behavior that constitutes violations of 
the law, fraud, and associated remedies, including suspension 
and debarment. In the conference report accompanying the 
William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2021 (H. Rept. 116-617), the conferees directed 
the Department to evaluate whether current suspension and 
debarment processes are sufficient to protect it from 
contractors that have been cited for willful or repeated fair 
labor standards violations under the Fair Labor Standards Act 
of 1938.
    (4) Improving Industrial Policy Leadership: The FY21 NDAA 
would require one of the Assistant Secretaries to be the 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy, 
whose principal duties will involve the overall supervision of 
policy of the Department for developing and maintaining the 
defense industrial base of the United States and ensuring a 
secure supply of materials critical to national security. It 
would further direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense for 
Industrial Base Policy and other officials to establish 
initiatives to help the Department of Defense better leverage 
the innovation and agility of small businesses.
    (5) Ensuring the Security of the Defense Industrial Base: 
Public Law 116-92 directed the Department to develop a 
consistent, comprehensive framework to enhance cybersecurity 
for the DIB in consultation with key stakeholders in industry. 
Additionally, Public Law 116-92 strengthened the requirements 
for the national security strategy for the national technology 
industrial base as well as the annual report to Congress to 
ensure actual mitigation strategies, individual responsible for 
the strategy, and the timelines to eliminate the gaps and 
vulnerabilities. The FY21 NDAA requires the DOD to provide 
quarterly status briefings to the committee on these efforts.
    (6) Invigorating Small Businesses: The committee continues 
to recognize small businesses as an engine of our economy and 
is concerned about the number of small businesses in the DIB. 
The FY21 NDAA directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense for 
Industrial Base Policy to establish initiatives that expand and 
diversify the number of small businesses in the national 
technology and industrial base, and improve their resiliency 
and competitiveness, even in the face of national emergencies. 
Given the importance of past performance evaluations to small 
businesses competing in the DIB, the FY21 NDAA requires 
contracting officers to consider a small business concern's 
past performance in a joint venture or as a first-tier 
subcontractor when evaluating the small business concern's 
offer for a prime contract, if the small business so chooses.
    (7) Expanding Acquisition Reform: The committee led efforts 
to continue and expand Acquisition Reform to the capability 
requirements process and sustainment activities. The FY21 NDAA 
requires the Department to conduct two assessments on the 
capability requirements process. Additionally, the FY21 NDAA 
directs a panel to look at weapon system sustainment as well as 
enhance the requirements of a weapon systems life cycle plan. 
The FY21 NDAA also includes the transfer and reorganization of 
the defense acquisition statutes, which will set the conditions 
for future reforms.
    (8) Future of Warfare: The FY21 NDAA expands the use of 
modularity in the design of weapons systems, as well as 
business systems and cybersecurity systems, to enable 
competition for upgrades as well as sustainment throughout a 
product's lifecycle, enhance interoperability, and to support 
combining and recombining systems in novel ways to achieve 
joint all-domain warfare and the emerging joint warfighting 
concept.

                          Financial Management

    In the 116th Congress, the committee continued to oversee 
military effectiveness and fiscal responsibility in a dynamic 
budgeting environment. Under the Budget Control Act (BCA) of 
2011 (Public Law 112-25), as modified by the Bipartisan Budget 
Act of 2019 (Public Law 116-37), recent years have seen 
significant increases in national defense discretionary 
spending, necessitating significant oversight in order to 
ensure the Department of Defense is a responsible steward of 
taxpayer dollars.
    The Comptroller General of the United States has 
consistently identified the Department of Defense's financial 
management as a high-risk area since 1995. The Department of 
Defense has made some progress in modernizing its financial 
management capabilities, but arcane and obsolete financial 
management processes and systems continue to struggle to 
accurately track and account for billions of dollars and 
funding and tangible assets, which undermines confidence in the 
Department's financial management systems and requires 
significant congressional oversight.
    The committee continued to review efforts to implement the 
Financial Improvement and Audit Readiness (FIAR) plan, as 
mandated by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84). The Inspector General of the 
Department of Defense conducted the first agency-wide financial 
audit of the Department in fiscal year 2018, and continues to 
conduct such audits annually. On May 16, 2019, the committee 
held a hearing examining the Department's progress and the path 
forward for audit readiness and remediation efforts. Committee 
staff also engaged regularly with the Department in order to 
examine trends and concerns within the broader audit effort, 
monitor interdependencies between the FIAR plan and business 
systems modernization efforts, and oversee corrective actions 
and process improvements. Both the Department and Congress 
depend on the objective tools provided by proper financial 
management processes and statements in order to make informed 
decisions.

                               READINESS

                        Maintenance and Training

    As the military services invest in modernization 
initiatives, continuing to make proper investments in the 
maintenance and training of legacy weapon systems through 
divestment is important for military readiness and the safety 
of personnel. To that end, the committee conducted oversight of 
the budget requests of the military services in support of 
weapon system sustainment and training and, where appropriate, 
recommended resource adjustments in the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) and 
the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA).
    The committee took particular interest in the challenge of 
getting Navy ships out of shipyard maintenance periods on 
schedule and on budget. In response, the committee conducted 
oversight of Navy initiatives to improve planning and execution 
of shipyard work and programming of shipyard availabilities in 
the budget request. Section 363 of Public Law 116-92 and 
section 343 of the FY21 NDAA sought to improve transparency and 
oversight of Navy ship depot maintenance budget requests and 
execution. Similarly, the committee noted concerns in both the 
committee reports accompanying the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116-120) and 
the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (H. Rept. 116-442) regarding depot 
carryover limits and the way the services calculate allowable 
depot workload that is carried over from one year to the next.
    The committee continued to examine the operational tempo of 
units to ensure that adequate periods for maintenance, 
training, and reset are built into the deployment cycles. This 
becomes more challenging as the services implement new concepts 
and introduce new weapon systems and capabilities into the 
force. To that end, the committee conducted oversight changes 
to the force generation models, such as the Army's Regionally 
Aligned Readiness and Modernization Model and the Navy's 
Optimized Fleet Response Plan, through reporting requirements 
included in the committee reports accompanying the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116-
120) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (H. Rept. 116-442).
    Finally, the committee examined ways that commercial best 
practices, new technology, and data analytics can help the 
military services more efficiently maintain weapon systems and 
effectively train personnel. This includes the collection of 
real-time data and analysis of historical maintenance records 
to develop a more efficient, predictive, and effective 
maintenance strategy as well as the use of augmented and 
virtual reality training and simulators to improve training. 
The committee conducted oversight of these initiatives through 
reporting requirements included in the committee reports 
accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116-120) and the William M. (Mac) 
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2021 (H. Rept. 116-442).

                               Logistics

    Survivable logistics is a key combat support area and a 
critical enabler underpinning U.S. military power. The 
committee conducted oversight of the Department of Defense's 
efforts to protect and sustain its prepositioned stocks, 
communications networks, and tanker, strategic airlift, and 
military sealift fleets. The committee also focused on 
oversight of the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), the Department 
of Defense entity responsible for managing the global supply 
chain and providing goods and services in support of the total 
force. DLA's role in supporting the requirements of geographic 
and functional combatant commands was also of importance to the 
committee.
    The Department of Defense often prioritizes funding of 
combat capabilities (weapon systems, warships, fighters, 
bombers, land combat vehicles) over logistics capabilities 
(sealift, fuel distribution, contested logistics assets). To 
that end, the committee noted the importance of investing in a 
more secure and resilient logistics and transportation 
infrastructure and set out to assist the Department of Defense 
in balancing its priorities and adequately funding the 
logistics enterprise. The committee examined the Department's 
airlift, sealift, and tanker sustainment and recapitalization 
plan, and in some cases prohibited divestiture of legacy assets 
until the Department fields a sufficient quantity of 
operational next-generation systems.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 
(Public Law 116-92) included a reporting requirement on 
strategic policy for prepositioned materiel and equipment. In 
addition, the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA), required 
the Department of Defense to designate a single organization to 
be responsible for bulk fuel management and delivery through 
the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command region and develop a bulk fuel 
management strategy. Finally, the FY21 NDAA mandated a 
recurring requirement for the Department of Defense to conduct 
a comprehensive review of sustainment and logistics 
requirements necessary to support the force structure, force 
modernization, infrastructure, and other elements of the 
defense program and policies of the United States. Finally, in 
the committee report accompanying the William M. (Mac) 
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2021 (H. Rept. 116-442), the committee required reports on 
Department of Defense Fuel Contracting and Department of 
Defense Warehouse Space Management.

                         Life-Cycle Sustainment

    Design decisions made during weapon system development can 
create sustainment problems that drive costly depot-level 
maintenance once the system is fielded. The committee focused 
on reducing the total ownership costs of weapon systems and 
equipment by ensuring the Department of Defense is developing, 
procuring, and modernizing weapon systems and equipment with 
consideration of life-cycle support and sustainment 
requirements and cost. To that end, section 802 of the William 
M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) seeks to improve sustainment 
planning in the acquisition milestone process and help control 
cost growth for major weapon systems.
    The committee continued to conduct oversight of weapon 
system sustainment issues by monitoring materiel condition 
metrics such as availability rates and mission capable rates. 
To improve congressional oversight and military service 
accountability, section 351 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) and 
section 347 of the FY21 NDAA implemented and then refined a 
requirement for the Department to develop materiel readiness 
metrics and objectives for major weapon systems, regularly 
review and update the metrics and objectives, and report on 
them with the annual budget request. Finally, the committee 
recognized the benefit of having continuous, independent review 
of the weapon system sustainment enterprise to constantly seek 
opportunities for improvement. To that end, section 345 of the 
FY21 NDAA would establish an independent advisory panel to 
focus on ways to improve the weapon system sustainment 
ecosystem.

                        Organic Industrial Base

    Our Nation's organic industrial base is vital to achieving 
and maintaining warfighting readiness across all domains. The 
military services' arsenals, depots, air logistics complexes, 
and shipyards provide long-term sustainment through programmed 
maintenance and conduct repair and modernization upgrades. 
These facilities and their skilled workforces provide a 
national-level insurance policy against unforeseen national 
strategic contingencies. The committee remained concerned about 
the current state and future health of the organic industrial 
base as a result of an extended period of fiscal uncertainty, 
increasing maintenance and sustainment requirements, workforce 
attrition and recruiting challenges, and an overemphasis on 
modernization initiatives at the expense of investments in 
maintaining legacy weapon systems.
    The committee continued to conduct oversight to ensure the 
Department of Defense's organic industrial base is viably 
positioned for long-term sustainability and has the workforce, 
equipment, and facilities for efficient operations to meet the 
Nation's current and future requirements. For example, section 
359 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2020 (Public Law 116-92) required the Secretary of Defense to 
develop a comprehensive strategy for improving the depot 
infrastructure of the military departments with the objective 
of ensuring that all depots have the capacity and capability to 
support the readiness and material availability goals of 
current and future weapon systems. The committee also conducted 
oversight of how the military services ensure the depot 
workforce possesses the capabilities and skills to support 
emerging requirements as well as how the military services are 
recruiting, training, and preparing to retain the future 
workforce. To this end, the William M. (Mac) Thornberry 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 
NDAA) would provide temporary authority to the Secretary of 
Defense to appoint retired members of the Armed Forces to 
positions at the level of GS-13 and below at defense industrial 
base facilities.
    The committee also continued its work to oversee carryover 
management. The committee noted concerns in both the committee 
reports accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116-120) and the William M. (Mac) 
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2021 (H. Rept. 116-442) regarding depot carryover limits and 
the way the services calculate allowable depot workload that is 
carried over from one year to the next.
    The committee took particular interest in the challenge of 
getting Navy ships out of shipyard maintenance periods on 
schedule and on budget. In response, the committee conducted 
oversight of Navy initiatives to improve planning and execution 
of shipyard work and programming of shipyard availabilities in 
the budget request. Section 363 of Public Law 116-92 and 
section 343 of the FY21 NDAA sought to improve transparency and 
oversight of Navy ship depot maintenance budget requests and 
execution.

                           Civilian Personnel

    The Federal civilian workforce of the Department of Defense 
plays a critical role in advancing national security. The 
Department employs more Federal civilians than any other agency 
and these personnel perform disparate and essential missions 
across the globe. The committee focused on providing the 
Department with the proper tools to invest in a strong civilian 
workforce that contributes effectively to the success of the 
Department's mission.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 
(Public Law 116-92) included several provisions to support the 
civilian workforce. In order to enable the entire Federal 
Government to better compete with the private sector for 
talent, Public Law 116-92 provided 12 weeks of paid parental 
leave to all Federal civilian employees. In addition, Public 
Law 116-92 provided that civilians moving as part of their 
employment within the Federal Government are not taxed for 
their relocation expenses paid for by the government. The bill 
provided extensions to the authority that permits certain 
allowances, benefits, and gratuities for civilian personnel on 
official duty in combat zones and to the authority that waives 
limitations on premium pay for civilians serving overseas. 
Public Law 116-92 also expanded and extended to 2025 several 
hiring authorities so that the Department of Defense can 
quickly hire civilian personnel into key areas, such as the 
defense industrial facilities (shipyards, depots, and arsenals) 
and major range and test facilities. Finally, in the committee 
report accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116-120), the committee noted 
concerns and established reporting requirements relating to 
involuntary civilian reductions in force, total force 
management, borrowed military manpower, and the use of term and 
temporary hiring authorities.
    The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) included 
additional legislative provisions to support the civilian 
workforce. The bill would extend paid parental leave to 
approximately 100,000 Federal civilians inadvertently excluded 
from the provision in Public Law 116-92, including Article I 
judges and employees at the Department of Veterans Affairs, 
Transportation Security Administration, Federal Aviation 
Administration, White House, and the courts and public 
defender's office in Washington, DC. In recognition of Federal 
civilians' dedicated service to the country throughout the 
pandemic, the FY21 NDAA also would permit the Office of 
Personnel Management to authorize agencies to allow most 
Federal civilians to carry over an additional 25 percent of 
annual leave into 2021. Further, the FY21 NDAA would prohibit 
the Secretary of Defense from reducing the civilian workforce 
unless the Department assesses the impact of such a reduction 
on workload, military force structure, lethality, readiness, 
and operational effectiveness. The FY21 NDAA also included the 
Elijah Cummings Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act, which 
would require each Federal agency to establish a model Equal 
Employment Opportunity Program that is independent of the 
agency's human capital or general counsel offices and would 
establish requirements related to complaints of discrimination 
and retaliation in the workplace. Finally, the FY21 NDAA would 
provide extensions to the authorities that permit certain 
allowances, benefits, and gratuities for civilian personnel on 
official duty in combat zones; waive limitations on premium pay 
for civilians serving overseas; and allow the Navy to pay 
overtime to certain civilian shipyard employees working in 
Japan.
    In the conference report accompanying the William M. (Mac) 
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2021 (H. Rept. 116-617), the conferees also noted that the 
Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has not yet implemented 
recommendations by the Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory 
Committee to align Federal wage system wage areas with General 
Schedule locality pay areas across the country and encouraged 
OPM to address this longstanding issue as soon as possible.

                  Personnel Background Investigations

    The committee is concerned about the timeliness, quality, 
and cost of processing Federal security clearance applications 
and the impact that has on our national security apparatus' 
ability to effectively recruit and retain high-quality 
professionals. In 2018, the Government Accountability Office 
added the government-wide personnel security clearance process 
to its High-Risk List, which identifies Federal areas in need 
of urgent reforms to address significant challenges. The 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public 
Law 115-91) directed that the Department of Defense resume 
responsibility for background investigations for Department of 
Defense personnel and defense contractors and directed the 
Secretary of Defense to begin a phased transition of all 
investigations previously conducted by the National Background 
Investigations Bureau (NBIB) to the Department of Defense. In 
October 2019, the NBIB was incorporated into the Defense 
Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA), which also 
absorbed several other components including the Defense 
Security Service and the Consolidated Adjudications Facility.
    Given the importance of conducting security, suitability, 
and credentialing background investigations for Department of 
Defense personnel, and the fact that the Department now has the 
responsibility to conduct the majority of such investigations 
solicited by the U.S. Government, the committee continued its 
oversight to ensure a smooth transition and that clearances are 
investigated and adjudicated in a timely fashion. The committee 
also continued its oversight of DCSA's transition to 
government-wide continuous vetting. To this end, the committee 
received quarterly briefings from the Department on security, 
suitability, and credentialing reform.
    In addition, the committee noted concerns in the committee 
report accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116-120) regarding the persistent 
backlog of security clearance applications and required the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees on the scope of the investigative and 
adjudicative backlog, plans to reduce the backlog, DCSA 
staffing, and reforms to ensure a high-quality security 
clearance process. Finally, the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) required the DCSA 
Director to provide a report on improving the quality of 
information in background investigation request packages.

                         Energy and Environment

    The military services continue to invest in installation 
and operational energy improvements. Energy resilient 
installations minimize the impacts of natural and manmade 
energy interruptions, ensuring continuity of operations. 
Increased efficiency enhances effectiveness and produces cost 
savings that can be applied to other installation readiness 
needs. Operational energy capability improvements enhance 
readiness by extending operational reach and on-station time 
and limiting reliance on fossil fuel convoys, improving our 
national security posture. Therefore, the committee continued 
to conduct oversight of the Department of Defense and military 
services' efforts to address resiliency gaps and improve energy 
efficiency on military installations and for military 
operations. To that end, where appropriate, the committee 
recommended resource adjustments and policy changes in the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public 
Law 116-92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA).
    The committee continued to examine the Department's 
policies and investments in both installation and operational 
energy, conducting oversight of these matters through analysis 
of budget requests and execution of existing policy. Sections 
317 and 319 of Public Law 116-92 sought to incentivize the 
Department of Defense to make more positive energy resilience 
investments. Sections 315, 316, 317, 2804, 2823, and 2825 of 
the FY21 NDAA addressed energy resilience and energy security 
on military installations. Sections 322, 323, and 324 of the 
FY21 NDAA sought to improve the Department's capability to make 
operational energy improvements. Similarly, the committee noted 
concerns in both the committee reports accompanying the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (H. 
Rept. 116-120) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (H. Rept. 116-
442) about the Department's execution of its operational energy 
and installation energy resilience programs.
    In addition, the committee conducted oversight of the 
Department and military services' environmental management. The 
committee expressed concern about the Department's efforts to 
address the impacts of climate change on training and 
installation resilience. Sections 326, 327, 328, 2801, 2804, 
2805, and 2806 of Public Law 116-92 sought to focus the 
Department's efforts toward improving installation resilience 
in the face of climate change. Sections 327, 328, and 2827 of 
the FY21 NDAA would require the Department to increase its 
transparency and update its analysis regarding greenhouse gas 
emissions and planning for climate change. Similarly, the 
committee noted concerns in both the committee reports 
accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116-120) and the William M. (Mac) 
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2021 (H. Rept. 116-442) about the Department's planning for 
installation resilience in the face of increasing instances of 
extreme weather, drought, wildfire, and sea-level rise.
    The committee continued to conduct oversight of the 
Department's efforts with respect to contamination caused by 
its use of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) to 
include identification and remediation of contaminated sites, 
and research and development of alternatives. Sections 322, 
323, 324, 329, and 330 of Public Law 116-92 sought to limit 
further contamination by limiting use of PFAS-containing fire-
fighting agents, creating guidance for handling and disposal of 
PFAS-contaminated materials, and banning the use of PFAS-
containing packaging for Meals Ready-to-Eat. Likewise, Sections 
330, 331, 332, 333, 334, and 335 of the FY21 NDAA sought to 
build on policies that encouraged transparency with communities 
and focused effort on research and development. Similarly, the 
committee noted concerns in both the committee reports 
accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116-120) and the William M. (Mac) 
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2021 (H. Rept. 116-442) about the Department's transparency in 
communicating with impacted communities and sense of urgency in 
remediating PFAS contamination in defense communities.

   Military Construction, Facilities Sustainment, and Real Property 
                               Management

    The committee continued its oversight of the Department of 
Defense's military construction program to manage the overall 
capacity of the Department's infrastructure and to ensure 
resilient long-term military construction investments. The 
committee also continued its oversight of the Department's 
investments in facility sustainment, restoration, and 
modernization, particularly as an instrument of disaster 
recovery and resiliency enhancement. To that end, the committee 
conducted oversight of budget requests of the Department of 
Defense and military services in support of the military 
construction program and where appropriate recommended resource 
adjustments and policy changes in the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) and 
the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA).
    The real property management process requires extensive 
oversight to maintain almost $749.0 billion in infrastructure. 
The committee conducted oversight of the Department's efforts 
to improve its internal management of its real property to 
include better requirements development to reduce project 
planning inefficiencies that have resulted in poorly 
coordinated investment decisions and suboptimal facility 
construction.
    The committee significantly increased its oversight of the 
Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI) program 
particularly with respect to maintenance and sustainment of 
housing developments. The committee noted a lack of oversight 
by the Department and military services of military family 
housing developments managed by private partners. The committee 
examined ways to enhance this oversight and make policy changes 
that would ensure military families lived only in safe, high-
quality MHPI homes. Title 30 of Public Law 116-92 sought to 
make sweeping changes to the management, oversight, sustainment 
of MHPI housing units, as well as improve the treatment of the 
tenants of these units. Sections 2811 through 2818 of the FY21 
NDAA sought to continue to increase accountability and 
transparency about the conditions and financial solvency of 
MHPI projects. Similarly, the committee noted concerns in both 
the committee reports accompanying the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116-120) and 
the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (H. Rept. 116-442).
    The committee also increased its oversight of installation 
resilience matters to include energy resiliency and resilience 
to climate change. As noted in the Energy and Environment 
section of this report, both Public Law 116-92 and and the FY21 
NDAA contained sections that sought to encourage enhancements 
in installation resiliency. Similarly, the committee noted 
concerns about gaps in the Department's policies related to 
resiliency in both the committee reports accompanying the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (H. 
Rept. 116-120) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (H. Rept. 116-
442).
    Finally, the FY21 NDAA included a provision that would 
establish an independent commission to make recommendations to 
the Secretary of Defense for the renaming of assets or removal 
of symbols, displays, monuments, and paraphernalia that 
commemorate the Confederate States of America or any person who 
served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America from 
all assets of the Department of Defense.

               MILITARY PERSONNEL AND HEALTH CARE ISSUES

                 Military Manpower and Force Structure

    During the 116th Congress, the committee continued to 
assess the military's manpower requirements to meet its current 
and future global military commitments. Specifically, the 
committee continued to provide aggressive oversight of military 
manpower levels, skill sets, and force structure to ensure they 
support the National Defense Strategy. In the 116th Congress, 
the committee examined trends in overall total force structure 
requirements, end strength, recruiting, retention, morale, and 
benefits and compensation.
    The committee focused on integration of women into combat 
arms positions in the Army and Marine Corps and on ensuring the 
military is inclusive and represents the demographics of the 
U.S. population. As part of this oversight the committee 
sponsored a congressional delegation (CODEL) to Fort Bragg and 
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, and another CODEL to Fort Lewis 
and Travis Air Force Base to meet with women who had 
transitioned to a combat arms position in units. The National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92) required the Marine Corps to gender integrate basic 
training at Parris Island within 5 years and at San Diego 
within 8 years. The committee also held a hearing on December 
10, 2019, on diversity in recruiting and retention and 
increasing diversity in the military.
    In the second session of the 116th Congress, the committee 
continued its oversight of increasing diversity in the military 
by including legislation in the William M. (Mac) Thornberry 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 
NDAA) that would require a Chief Diversity Officer of the 
Department of Defense and would require the Secretary of 
Defense to create a strategy for increasing diversity in the 
military as part of the National Defense Strategy, to include 
measurable metrics with a progress report as part of each new 
National Defense Strategy.

                   Military Benefits and Compensation

    During the 116th Congress, the committee gave close 
scrutiny to draft proposals from the Department of Defense 
calling for changes to military compensation and other benefit 
programs. The oversight of the Subcommittee on Military 
Personnel ensured such proposals were thoroughly assessed with 
respect to their positive or negative impacts to the All-
Volunteer Force. Specifically, the draft Department of Defense 
proposals to reform the Reserve Component call-up duty status 
authorities which would overhaul the way a Reserve Component 
service member is activated were considered. The subcommittee's 
oversight in this area was concentrated on the proper alignment 
of the new authorities to ensure that the pay and benefits for 
Reserve Component members would not be adversely affected. To 
that end, on March 27, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on Reserve Component duty status reform. Although the 
Department of Defense unveiled to the committee a very detailed 
and thorough plan for changes to the duty status authorities, 
the proposal did not reach the committee in time for inclusion 
in the fiscal year 2020 or 2021 National Defense Authorization 
Acts.
    The subcommittee's oversight of pay and allowance issues 
led the committee, as part of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92), to 
recommend no change to current law, thereby enabling the by-law 
3.1 percent raise in basic pay during calendar year 2020 based 
on section 1009 of title 37, United States Code. It is the 
intent of the underlying law to ensure military pay raises 
match the rate of compensation increases in the private sector 
as measured by the Employment Cost Index. As part of the 
William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA), the committee again 
recommended no change to the current law which would result in 
a basic pay increase of 3.0 percent for 2021. Additionally, the 
FY21 NDAA included legislation that would increase certain 
hazardous duty incentive pay for members of the uniformed 
services.
    Public Law 116-92 and the FY21 NDAA also extended the 
authorities to pay bonuses and special pays during fiscal year 
2020 and fiscal year 2021, and the subcommittee monitored the 
value of those bonuses and special pays to ensure they were 
sufficient to achieve the recruiting and retention objectives 
for which they were developed. The FY21 NDAA includes 
legislation that would increase the bonus authority for officer 
healthcare professionals to help to address the Department of 
Defense's overall shortage in this critical area.
    Finally, the committee maintained focus on the Survivor 
Benefit Plan (SBP) financial offset from the Dependency and 
Indemnity Compensation (DIC). Legislation in the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
181) established a Special Survivor Indemnity Allowance for 
surviving spouses who are the beneficiary of the SBP annuity 
and have their annuity partially or fully offset by the DIC 
which was due to expire. The committee's continued oversight in 
this area and the focus on a whole-of-Congress solution for the 
complete repeal of the SBP annuity offset by DIC led to 
legislation being included in Public Law 116-92 that eliminated 
the offset.

                         Military Health System

    During the 116th Congress, the committee continued its 
oversight of military health policies of the Department of 
Defense. The Department is charged with both supporting the 
readiness requirements of the warfighter and delivering a 
robust military health benefit, all while creating efficiencies 
and implementing cost savings initiatives that may alter the 
composition of the existing Military Health System (MHS). 
Through briefings and hearings, the committee examined military 
medical manning requirements, TRICARE benefit delivery, wounded 
warrior programs, resiliency, opioid policy, and ongoing reform 
efforts that are transitioning military treatment facilities 
and other organizational structures from the military service 
departments to the Defense Health Agency. The committee also 
continued to monitor the implementation of the Genesis 
Electronic Health Record, as well as other health-related 
collaborations between the Department of Defense and Department 
of Veterans Affairs such as suicide prevention. The committee 
held two joint hearings with the House Committee on Veterans' 
Affairs to review both electronic health records and veteran 
suicide.
    The committee held a hearing on the Feres Doctrine to hear 
testimony on whether the policy needed reform to improve the 
quality of healthcare delivered in military treatment 
facilities as well as provide more compensation to 
beneficiaries impacted by medical malpractice. Although the 
committee did not repeal or change the Feres Doctrine, the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public 
Law 116-92) authorized the Secretary of Defense to allow, 
settle, and pay an administrative claim against the United 
States for personal injury or death of a member of the 
uniformed services that was the result of medical malpractice 
caused by a Department of Defense healthcare provider.
    During the second session of the 116th Congress the 
committee continued to monitor the Department's reform of the 
MHS as well as provided considerable oversight of the 
Department's response to COVID. The committee held two member-
level briefings with outside experts on the Department's 
response to the pandemic and the staff held numerous briefings 
with the Department on topics from force protection to testing 
and vaccine development and distribution. The William M. (Mac) 
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2021 (FY21 NDAA) includes provisions that would require the 
Department to review its posture, plans, and training for 
future pandemics; create a registry of TRICARE beneficiaries 
diagnosed with COVID-19; and partner with civilian healthcare 
and Federal agencies to enhance interoperability and create 
medical surge capability and capacity of the national medical 
system.

                       Military Personnel Policy

    During the 116th Congress, the personnel policies of the 
Department of Defense remained under considerable scrutiny as 
the services compete to recruit, manage, and retain the best 
and brightest men and women. The Subcommittee on Military 
Personnel continued to give close examination to proposals from 
the Department of Defense and other organizations calling for 
any major changes to personnel policies including recruiting, 
promotions, career paths or changes to military retention, 
talent management, and other policy programs in order to assess 
the impact of any proposed changes on the viability of the All-
Volunteer Force.
    As a part of this personnel policy oversight, the 
subcommittee focused on officer personnel management. To that 
end, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2020 (Public Law 116-92) authorized personnel policies to 
increase the Department's flexibility to manage personnel 
talent. The provisions included the authority of promotion 
boards to recommend that officers of particular merit be placed 
higher on the promotion list. The William M. (Mac) Thornberry 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 
NDAA) includes a provision that would expand the availability 
of enhanced constructive service credit in a particular career 
field upon original appointment as a commissioned officer.
    In a continuation of the subcommittee's oversight 
responsibilities, on March 12, 2019, the subcommittee met to 
receive testimony on outside perspectives on military personnel 
policy, and on May 16, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony from the Department of Defense on military personnel 
management.
    In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) 
pandemic, the subcommittee included in the FY21 NDAA several 
authorizations that concerned the management of the Reserve 
Components that have been called to duty in response to the 
pandemic. The authorities include constructive credit for 
certain members of the Reserve Components who could not 
complete minimum annual training requirements as a result of 
the COVID-19 pandemic, and quarantine housing for members of 
the National Guard who perform certain duty in response to the 
COVID-19 emergency.
    Since the establishment of the U.S. Space Force as a 
separate service in Public Law 116-92 the committee continued 
to work with the Department to oversee, establish, and 
legislate the appropriate personnel policies for the new 
service. To that end, the subcommittee participated in 
quarterly briefings by the Space Force leadership on the way 
forward for manning the Space Force, general personnel 
policies, and specific general officer manning numbers and 
associated personnel policy.

 Uniform Code of Military Justice, Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence

    The committee continued its record of providing effective 
oversight of military justice, which included implementation of 
the comprehensive overhaul of the Uniform Code of Military 
Justice mandated by the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328). The committee also 
continued its robust oversight of the Department of Defense's 
sexual assault prevention and response programs with a focus on 
implementation of best practices for prevention programs, 
including programs designed to address and prevent domestic 
violence in the military.
    In exercising its oversight of sexual assault prevention 
and response, the committee executed several congressional 
delegations (CODELs) and staff delegations focused on programs 
at the installation level. The oversight trips, coupled with 
two hearings on sexual assault and one hearing on domestic 
violence, helped the committee shape and pass legislation to 
better protect and provide care for victims of sexual assault 
and domestic violence. The National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) increased resources 
available to sexual assault survivors, including an increase in 
the number of investigative personnel and Victim Witness 
Assistance Program liaisons, with the goal of ensuring that 
investigations of sex-related offenses be completed not later 
than 6 months after the date of initiation. It also required 
additional training for commanders regarding disposition of 
sexual assault and collateral offenses. Public Law 116-92 also 
required the Department of Defense to establish a program to 
provide legal counsel to domestic violence victims to assist 
them before and during the court-martial process. Counsel 
providing services under this program were also required to 
receive specialized training on issues commonly associated with 
domestic violence.
    In the second session of the 116th Congress, the 
Subcommittee on Military Personnel held a hearing on racial 
disparities in the military justice system to discuss causes 
and potential remedies. The committee focused significantly on 
Fort Hood, Texas, and the deaths of several soldiers, to 
include Specialist (SPC) Vanessa Guillen. The committee 
conducted one briefing with the Army's Criminal Investigation 
Command to hear details of the disappearance and investigation 
of the death of SPC Guillen and one hybrid hearing covering the 
U.S. Army Forces Command Inspector General's review of the 
sexual harassment and assault prevention programs at Fort Hood, 
which included testimony from two advocates for victims of 
military sexual trauma. The committee also sponsored a CODEL to 
Fort Hood to receive information firsthand from investigators, 
commanders, and soldiers. Finally, the subcommittee held a 
hearing with the Fort Hood Independent Review Committee to 
discuss the 9 findings and 70 recommendations the committee 
made to the Secretary of the Army regarding the problems 
emanating from Fort Hood.
    The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 includes provisions that 
would create an independent civilian task force to study and 
make recommendations to prevent and prosecute domestic violence 
within the military services, require establishment of a 
capability for confidential reporting of sexual harassment, and 
require implementation of a Safe to Report policy across the 
services that establishes standards for the handling of 
collateral misconduct committed by victims of sexual assault.

                       Military Family Readiness

    During the 116th Congress, the Subcommittee on Military 
Personnel continued to focus on the support provided to 
families of members of the Armed Forces, particularly when 
their servicemember spouse is deployed. The subcommittee 
continued to assess the methods used by the military services 
to identify the needs of military families and to identify the 
programs and policies that can be implemented or modified to 
improve their quality of life. As end strengths of the Armed 
Forces continued to increase, the committee closely examined 
the Department of Defense and military services' family support 
programs to ensure the programs are adequately resourced to 
support an increase in family members.
    In addition, the subcommittee continued close oversight on 
the quality and availability of services at Department of 
Defense child development centers. To that end, the continued 
rigorous oversight of the subcommittee on family readiness 
issues resulted in the inclusion of several provisions in the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public 
Law 116-92) relating to a critical component of family 
readiness, childcare. The provisions included authorizing 
service members to take leave for a birth or adoption in more 
than one increment, and deferring deployment for one year for 
service members who give birth. Additionally, further 
improvements to childcare availability were addressed, 
including the direct hire of childcare employees.
    Spouse employment and education issues were also of 
continued importance in the William M. (Mac) Thornberry 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 
NDAA). Provisions were included that would address the 
expansion of the My Career Advancement Account program for 
military spouses to nonportable career fields and occupations 
and expand financial assistance under My Career Advancement 
Account program to assist spouses with continuing education. 
The subcommittee continued its oversight efforts with regard to 
childcare and the FY21 NDAA included childcare provisions that 
would require childcare availability for shift workers, 
establish a program for financial assistance for service 
members using in-home child care, and an assessment of 
financial assistance available to service members using non-
Department of Defense child care facilities. A focus on 
enhancing children's education resulted in provisions included 
in the FY21 NDAA that would establish a pilot program to expand 
eligibility for enrollment at domestic dependent elementary and 
secondary school, and a pilot program on expanded eligibility 
for Department of Defense Education Activity Virtual High 
School program to further assist military families. Finally, 
the FY21 NDAA would require the Department of Defense to 
standardize and improve the Exceptional Family Member Program 
to assist families with special needs.

 Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Programs and Military Resale Programs

    The committee believes the cost-efficient sustainment of 
Morale, Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) and military resale 
programs (commissaries and exchanges) is required to protect 
quality of life in military communities. The Subcommittee on 
Military Personnel provided oversight efforts directed toward 
that end in conjunction with continuing major resale reforms, 
begun in the 114th Congress, to ensure the continued viability 
of these programs.
    Additionally, the subcommittee believes that MWR and 
military resale programs must remain competitive with private 
sector entities to ensure that service members and their 
families benefit fully from these programs. During the 116th 
Congress, the subcommittee monitored current practices and 
policies to ensure that MWR and military resale programs 
employed the full range of strategies available to private 
sector competitors to inform authorized patrons about the 
benefits associated with these programs and encourage their 
participation.
    The subcommittee continued to monitor and oversee the 
changes required by the commissary reform plan with an emphasis 
on maintaining this valuable benefit without interruption. To 
that end, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) contained a provision on defense 
resale matters that required the Department of Defense to 
develop a business strategy that preserves service member 
savings. During the 116th Congress, the Subcommittee on 
Military Personnel continued its oversight of the defense 
retail system by receiving a quarterly briefing from the 
Department of Defense on the savings targets and the ongoing 
resale reform plan. This oversight continued throughout the 
116th Congress and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 contains a 
provision that would expand the previous provisions on this 
issue to restart the reform process by mandating an updated 
business case analysis for the reform and for consolidation of 
the defense resale system.

                 Prisoner of War and Missing in Action

    During the 116th Congress, the committee continued 
oversight of the Department of Defense's Prisoner of War/
Missing in Action activities. Specifically, the committee 
focused on the operations of the Defense Personnel Accounting 
Agency (DPAA) to ensure they are meeting the requirement that 
the accounting effort achieve at least 200 identifications 
annually. Committee staff met multiple times with the 
leadership of DPAA to monitor progress in achieving the 
required minimum 200 identifications annually. DPAA continues 
to work to regain access to recover missing service members 
from North Korea as a humanitarian mission. Unfortunately, due 
to COVID, DPAA had to cancel the majority of its overseas 
operations, but remains postured to execute when the conditions 
allow. DPAA laboratories were able to devise ways to continue 
forensic identification work in Hawaii and at Offutt Air Force 
Base, Nebraska, yielding 120 identifications for fiscal year 
2020.

                      Arlington National Cemetery

    The committee continued its oversight from the 115th 
Congress of Arlington National Cemetery (ANC) into the 116th 
Congress. The John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232) directed the 
Secretary of the Army to establish revised eligibility criteria 
for interment at Arlington National Cemetery to ensure that the 
cemetery remains an active burial ground well into the future. 
The Secretary of the Army announced the draft proposed criteria 
September 25, 2019. The Army has conducted over three and half 
years of thoughtful deliberation and public outreach--including 
with veteran and military service organizations--and active 
engagement with ANC senior leaders and the Advisory Committee 
on ANC. On September 15, 2020, the Army announced a 60-day 
public comment period and is in the rulemaking process for 
revised eligibility for burial and inurnment into Arlington 
National Cemetery.

                  MODERNIZATION AND INVESTMENT ISSUES

                                Overview

    During the 116th Congress, the committee conducted 
oversight of military equipment modernization strategies and 
programs. The committee assessed the effectiveness of those 
strategies and their ability to mitigate threats in the near-
term and long-term from near-peer and peer competitors. The 
committee's efforts focused on full-spectrum, combat-effective 
lethality from near-term modernization efforts that utilize 
acquisition reform initiatives to speed development and 
fielding of solutions to the warfighter. The committee devoted 
attention to the military services' implementation and 
utilization of new, innovative, and agile acquisition reform 
authorities to recapitalize, upgrade, or enhance the 
performance of current and future combat systems. The committee 
also conducted oversight on the military services' ability to 
aggressively control development and procurement costs, 
implement reasonable, executable and accountable sustainment 
strategies that preserve system affordability, as well as 
manage strategic risk in critical areas of the U.S. defense 
industrial base.
    The committee conducted oversight and produced legislation 
that subsequently provides resources to mitigate cost growth 
and schedule delays of modernization programs. The committee 
assessed the need for legislative action on a range of concerns 
including late determination of programmatic requirements; 
unjustified requirements growth and failure to properly 
mitigate requirements changes; insufficient analyses of 
alternatives; concurrency in test and evaluation master plans; 
military services proceeding prematurely with development of 
immature technology; poor cost estimating; inadequate funding 
profiles; over-estimation of potential production rates; 
program instability; and, improper use of new and agile 
acquisition reform authorities.

                     Armored Vehicle Modernization

    The committee focused on oversight of the Army and Marine 
Corps' evolving plans to improve the capability and extend the 
operating lives of its current heavy- and medium-weight armored 
combat vehicles. The committee evaluated plans for and 
conducted oversight of research, development, production, and 
timely fielding of its current fleets and next generation of 
these systems. The committee focused oversight efforts on 
management of these programs: the Next Generation Combat 
Vehicle including the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle, M1 
Abrams tank, the M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicles, the family of 
Stryker Combat Vehicles, the family of Amphibious Combat 
Vehicles, the Light Armored Vehicle, the M109A7 Paladin 
Integrated Management, the Armored Multipurpose Vehicle, the 
Army's mobile protected firepower, and Active Protection 
Systems for combat vehicles.

                       Tactical Wheeled Vehicles

    The committee conducted oversight of the Army and Marine 
Corps' current and future tactical wheeled vehicle (TWV) 
fleets, including their families of light, medium, and heavy 
TWVs and the family of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected 
Vehicles. The committee specifically focused those efforts on 
management of these programs: Family of Medium Tactical 
Vehicles, Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck, Joint Light 
Tactical Vehicle, Ground Mobility Vehicle, Infantry Squad 
Vehicle, and High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle.

                          Rotorcraft Programs

    The committee focused oversight efforts on rotorcraft 
modernization, force structure, and readiness. The committee 
specifically examined how the military services are balancing 
plans to accelerate development of next generation rotorcraft 
platforms with requirements to upgrade current rotorcraft 
platforms. Program areas of oversight interest for the 
committee included the following programs: UH-60 Black Hawk 
utility rotorcraft, AH-64 Apache Attack rotorcraft, CH-47 
Chinook heavy lift rotorcraft, UH-1 Huey utility helicopters, 
AH-1 attack helicopter, CH-53K heavy lift rotorcraft program, 
UH-1N utility helicopter replacement program, Combat Rescue 
Helicopter, TH-73 advanced helicopter training system, and the 
Future Vertical Lift (FVL) development program.
    The committee also conducted oversight on advanced aircraft 
survivability equipment upgrades to provide warning and 
protection against evolving threats, and monitored the Improved 
Turbine Engine program, designed to improve lift capability on 
the AH-64, UH-60, and FVL platforms.

                  Communications and Network Programs

    The committee conducted oversight on the research, 
development, and procurement of tactical battlefield 
communications networks. Specifically, the committee examined 
the Army's plans for future battlefield network research and 
development programs, the Army's Tactical Network Modernization 
roadmap, and efforts on the incremental development and 
fielding of the Integrated Tactical Network and other tactical 
radio programs. The committee began and will continue to 
conduct oversight on the Army's ``Project Convergence'' and 
development of systems that will contribute to Joint All-Domain 
Command and Control.

                Individual Soldier and Marine Equipment

    The committee continued to monitor and oversee the 
research, development, and procurement of soldier and marine 
individual equipment, as well as other complementary personal 
protective equipment programs. Focus areas included: advances 
in weight reduction (``lightening the load'') in individual 
equipment; development of female-specific individual protective 
equipment; development and procurement of the Enhanced Night 
Vision Goggle-Binocular; small arms and small caliber 
ammunition modernization with particular emphasis on the Army's 
next generation squad weapon system; procurement and fielding 
of enhanced performance small caliber rounds; improved combat 
helmets to help mitigate traumatic brain injury; and the 
development and fielding of the Integrated Visual Augmentation 
System.

               Fixed-Wing Tactical and Training Aircraft

    During the 116th Congress, the committee continued 
oversight efforts on the size, composition, capability, and 
capacity of the Department of Defense's tactical and training 
aircraft force structure. The committee engaged the Department 
through hearings and classified events to understand its 
aircraft force-mix strategy and composition regarding 
procurement of advanced-4th, 5th, and 6th generation tactical 
aircraft. Specifically, the committee scrutinized plans to 
recapitalize existing tactical aircraft to ensure that mission 
areas related to air superiority, interdiction, and kinetic 
support to land and maritime forces maintain combat 
effectiveness requirements. The committee engaged the Air 
Force, Navy, and Marine Corps to understand development, 
production, and recapitalization strategies to mitigate 
forecasted tactical aircraft inventory shortfalls that impact 
the Department's ability to implement the National Defense 
Strategy. The committee continued oversight of the Department's 
efforts to improve capabilities and reliability among the 
legacy fleet of aircraft and closely monitored the impacts on 
aviation readiness related to procurement of initial spares, 
repaired parts, and consumable supplies.
    The committee continued oversight of the F-35 program, 
particularly with regard to affordability issues and concerns 
related to program life-cycle cost, production and fielding 
schedules, aircraft and support system performance, and 
sustainment strategy planning and execution. The committee 
focused oversight efforts on the F-35's performance during the 
Initial Operational Test and Evaluation phase, Block 4 software 
development, and the Continuous Capability Development and 
Delivery follow-on modernization program. The committee's focus 
areas on the F-35 program included production efficiency, 
software development and testing related to the operational 
flight program and mission data files, addressing F135 engine 
supply chain and risks, the Autonomic Logistics Information 
System (ALIS) fielding and integration into operational F-35 
units, the beginning stages of the follow-on system named the 
Operational Data Integration Network to replace the 
dysfunctional ALIS, depot stand-up and facilitization, and 
supply chain management required to support concurrent 
production and operational maintenance and sustainment 
requirements.
    In addition, the committee examined acquisition strategies 
related to the experimentation effort of the Air Force's Light 
Attack and Armed Reconnaissance platform, the Air Force's F-
15EX new start program, and the Air Force's and Navy's initial 
plans and concepts for development of Next Generation Air 
Dominance capabilities. The committee continued engagement with 
the Air Force and Navy regarding efforts to mitigate 
physiological episodes that were prevalent and experienced by 
pilots operating tactical and training aircraft equipped with 
the On-Board Oxygen Generating System.

                    Tactical Missiles and Munitions

    During the 116th Congress, the committee engaged the 
Department of Defense on oversight of the testing and war-
reserve material requirements and subsequent production 
strategies to support and maintain sufficient inventories of 
conventional tactical aircraft missiles and munitions at an 
acceptable risk level. The committee focused its attention on 
the Department's identification, assessment, and strategies for 
management of risk in the associated defense industrial base 
and issues related to diminishing manufacturing sources, 
obsolescence issues, sole-source supply of components and major 
sub-systems, and production capabilities needed to support both 
annual production and surge requirements when necessary. The 
committee examined the stability and predictability of the 
Department's near and long-term budget planning and execution 
to control cost and reduce uncertainty in the defense 
industrial base.
    Specifically, the committee focused on a wide-array of 
missile, munitions, and ammunition programs of the Department 
of Defense, including but not limited to: high-energy lasers, 
Maneuver Short Range Air Defense, Indirect Fire Protection 
Capability Interceptors, Iron Dome Interceptors, Precision 
Strike Missile, Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System, Joint 
Air-to-Ground missile, the Army Tactical Missile System, 
Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air missile, Small Diameter Bomb I 
& II, Joint Direct Attack Munition, Joint Air-to-Surface 
Standoff Missile-Extended Range, Joint Advanced Tactical 
Missile, and precision-guided and preferred munitions 
supporting the deterrence and warfighting requirements of the 
geographical combatant commanders.

                         Bomber Force Structure

    During the 116th Congress, the committee continued 
oversight efforts on the size, composition, capability, and 
capacity of the Department of Defense's bomber aircraft force 
structure. The committee is monitoring the development of the 
long-range strike bomber aircraft B-21A Raider as the program 
moves through acquisition. Section 132 and section 133 of the 
William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2021 provide guidance to the Air Force on 
reviewing the bomber fleet mix and end strength. The committee 
also understands that long-range strike with standoff weapons 
will principally be conducted by the B-1 Lancer and B-52 
Stratofortress bombers over the next decade. The committee is 
reviewing the development of a legacy bomber modernization 
program that is commensurate with the intended service life and 
fielding of advanced weapons.
    The committee conducted oversight of the budget request in 
support of the B-52 Stratofortress Commercial Engine 
Replacement Program and, where appropriate, recommended 
resource adjustments in section 4201 of the FY21 NDAA.

                       Aerial Refueling Aircraft

    During the 116th Congress, the committee reviewed the Air 
Force aerial refueling aircraft modernization and 
recapitalization programs, along with the Navy's nascent 
refueling capability associated with the MQ-25 Stingray 
program.
    The Air Force currently requires 479 air refueling tankers 
to meet the National Defense Strategy but only possesses 395 
KC-135R/T Stratotankers and 56 KC-10A Extender tankers for a 
total of 451 legacy tankers. The committee is watching the 
procurement of KC-46A Pegasus aircraft in light of the 
continuing deficiencies in the remote vision system and is 
cautiously optimistic the aircraft is on the path to be an 
operational air refueling aircraft in all situations. The 
addition of KC-46A aircraft will eventually grow the tanker 
force to 479 aircraft. Subsequently, the Air Force plans to 
replace its older tankers one-for-one with the planned 179 KC-
46A aircraft. Section 135 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 
provides guidance to the structure of the air refueling fleet 
until the KC-46A is operational. The remaining 300 KC-135 
aircraft will need to be modernized. The committee has taken 
several briefs with the way ahead for the KC-135s to conduct 
operations in contested airspace.
    The committee visited and received several briefings and is 
continuing to review the MQ-25 program as the Navy seeks to 
develop an unmanned aerial vehicle that adds an additional air 
refueling capabilities. The committee received additional 
briefings on capability, modernization, and procurement of the 
KC-130J.

                            Airlift Programs

    During the 116th Congress, the committee continued 
oversight efforts on the size, composition, capability, and 
capacity of the Department of Defense's strategic and tactical 
aircraft force structure. The committee engaged the Department 
through hearings and briefings to understand tactical airlift 
modernization and recapitalization strategy. The committee 
engaged the Air Force to understand the modernization of the C-
130H Hercules aircraft propellers and engines. The committee 
continued to assess the risk in the Air Force's current plan to 
maintain an intratheater airlift aircraft inventory to support 
the National Defense Strategy supported by section 134 of the 
William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA).
    The committee continued to provide oversight of the C-5M 
Super Galaxy and C-17A Globemaster III modernization programs 
per section 4101 of the FY21 NDAA.

                        Surface Warfare Programs

    The Department of the Navy must expand the core 
capabilities of U.S. seapower to achieve a blend of peacetime 
engagement and major combat operations capabilities as part of 
the Navy's 355-ship requirement. During the 116th Congress, the 
committee provided oversight of the composition, capacity, and 
capabilities of the surface fleet. The committee also assessed 
the large and small surface combatant requirements to ensure 
oversight of the force structure and the associated weapons and 
sensors employed on the surface force with a specific emphasis 
on Frigate capabilities. The committee continued to conduct 
oversight of the Littoral Combat Ship and the sensors that will 
be fielded as part of the mission modules. Further oversight of 
the amphibious forces will also be pursued to include an 
analysis of what the optimal build cadence is, integration of 
advanced data capabilities and the amphibious assault 
connectors, and how best to support expeditionary basing. The 
committee continued its oversight of the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke 
class Destroyer program and followed the transition to the 
Flight III variant that incorporate the new air and missile 
defense radar. The committee also monitored the requirements 
associated with the new large surface combatant that the Navy 
indicates will be fielded in the near future. In addition to 
the manned platforms, the committee will review options for the 
Navy to augment the surface force structure with both unmanned 
and optionally manned platforms and will ensure these programs 
are sufficiently mature before the start of construction. 
Finally, the committee reviewed the combat logistics forces and 
the Maritime Security Program to ensure sufficient capacity is 
available to support national security objectives.
    As part of this oversight, the committee continued to place 
a significant emphasis on improving affordability in 
shipbuilding programs through: ensuring stable requirements; 
the use of acquisition best practices; stability within the 
overall program; increased reliance on common systems and open 
architecture; and industrial base capacity, process, and 
facility improvements at the shipyards.

                       Undersea Warfare Programs

    The ability to operate freely at sea is one of the most 
important enablers of joint and interagency operations, and sea 
control requires capabilities in all aspects of the maritime 
domain. There are many challenges to our ability to exercise 
sea control, perhaps none as significant as the growing number 
of nations operating submarines, both advanced diesel-electric 
and nuclear propelled. Exercising sea control in the undersea 
domain is essential to maintaining the freedom of navigation in 
support of U.S. maritime interests. The committee continued to 
review the undersea domain to ensure warfare dominance. 
Specifically, the committee reviewed short- and long-term 
options to reverse the decline in the attack submarine force 
structure as well as options to augment the undersea fleet with 
unmanned underwater vehicles. The committee also assessed 
whether sufficient resources and technological maturity are 
available for the recapitalization of the ballistic missile 
submarine force. Additionally, the committee monitored the 
development of the requirements associated with the follow-on 
attack submarine to the Virginia class. Finally, the committee 
assessed the weapons and sensors employed in the undersea 
domain to retain maritime dominance, to include the capacity 
and capabilities of unmanned undersea vehicles.
    As part of this oversight, the committee placed specific 
emphasis on the efficacy of multi-year procurement, rigorous 
assessment of requirements, and management of an expanding 
undersea industrial base capacity.

    Military Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Programs

    The committee conducted oversight activities on cost, 
schedule, and performance outcomes of tactical manned and 
unmanned aerial intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance 
(ISR) systems. The committee examined the ISR enterprise for 
balance in inventory, satisfaction of military collection 
requirements, timeliness and redundancy of dissemination 
architecture, and modernization of analysis and exploitation 
capabilities for video and imagery. The committee monitored the 
Department of Defense's ISR policy development and 
implementation.
    The committee evaluated the Department of Defense's long-
term ISR architecture modernization and next-generation 
acquisition strategy. It further examined the supporting 
analysis behind programmatic decisions, the management of risk 
across ISR collection capabilities and capacities, and the 
corresponding resources to process, exploit, and disseminate 
raw data and finished analysis. The committee conducted 
oversight on improvements made to ISR transmission and down-
link architecture that provide rapid delivery of collected 
information supporting timely and effective defense operations.
    The committee's oversight efforts included the following 
ISR programs: RQ-4 Global Hawk unmanned aerial system (UAS) 
Block 30 and Block 40, MQ-9 Reaper UAS, MQ-1C Gray Eagle UAS, 
U-2 aircraft, RC-135 aircraft, Joint Surveillance Target Attack 
Radar System aircraft, E-3 Airborne Warning and Control System 
aircraft, and the Advanced Battle Management System.

                       Nuclear Forces and Posture

    The committee oversaw the atomic energy defense activities 
of the Department of Energy and nuclear policies and programs 
of the Department of Defense to ensure the safety, security, 
reliability, and credibility of the U.S. nuclear deterrent. The 
committee ensured that the United States maintains a safe, 
secure, and reliable nuclear arsenal to address current and 
future threats. The committee conducted oversight of the 
Department of Energy and the Department of Defense's nuclear 
modernization and sustainment plans, nuclear deterrence and 
posture, including programs and policies included in the 2018 
Nuclear Posture Review.
    In particular, the committee oversaw funding levels and 
requirements for the nuclear deterrence mission and nuclear 
enterprise, including relevant nuclear delivery platforms and 
their associated warheads to ensure resources are provided and 
allocated effectively and efficiently across Department of 
Energy and Department of Defense, including through budget 
hearings on these proposed programs. With regard to the 
Department of Defense, the committee emphasized oversight of 
major acquisition programs that will recapitalize U.S. nuclear 
forces and the supporting complex for decades into the future, 
including but not limited to the Ground Based Strategic 
Deterrent system, the Long-Range Standoff cruise missile, and 
missiles associated with the new Columbia-class submarine. The 
committee also placed particular emphasis on investments in 
nuclear enterprise programs that fall under the purview of the 
Department of Energy, including but not limited to 
infrastructure investments, warhead life extension programs, 
stockpile stewardship programs, stockpile management programs, 
cost savings and efficiency initiatives, safety and security, 
and progress on the nuclear clean-up activities. The committee 
held a hearing on the cause and impacts of delays and cost 
increases of the B61 life extension program and W88 alteration 
program in September 2019, and included provisions in both the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public 
Law 116-92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) on 
improving oversight of the plutonium pit production and nuclear 
weapons acquisition programs. The committee also initiated 
discussions on the importance of hiring and retaining a 
diverse, world-class workforce, requiring detailed reporting in 
the FY21 NDAA.
    In addition, the committee continued oversight of the 
nuclear command and control programs that underpin a reliable 
nuclear deterrent.
    Alongside overseeing and authorizing U.S. nuclear programs, 
the committee monitored foreign nuclear weapon development and 
modernization programs, holding classified briefings on China 
and Russia's nuclear weapons in November 2019 and on Chinese 
nuclear modernization programs in December 2020, and included 
requirements for classified reports and an independent report 
on adversary nuclear weapons programs in the FY21 NDAA.
    The committee provided oversight of the U.S. nuclear policy 
and posture, extended deterrence policy, arms control 
activities, and nuclear force structure requirements, including 
impacts on strategic stability. Continuing efforts to inform 
dialog on measures to enhance deterrence and stability, Public 
Law 116-92 included a provision requiring an independent report 
on benefits and risks of a potential U.S. posture of no-first-
use of nuclear weapons. In addition to a hearing by the 
committee in March 2019 to receive outside views on U.S. 
nuclear posture, the committee held a hearing in February 2019 
on the value of nuclear arms control, with Senator Richard 
Lugar, former Ambassador Alexander Vershbow, and former 
Assistant Secretary of State Paula DeSutter. The committee also 
held a classified briefing on the Open Skies Treaty in February 
2020, and both Public Law 116-92 and the FY21 NDAA included 
provisions regarding the process and decision to withdraw from 
the Open Skies Treaty.

                            Missile Defense

    The committee oversaw the Department of Defense's efforts 
to develop, test, and field layered missile defense 
capabilities to protect the United States, its deployed forces, 
and allies and partners against missile threats.
    The committee continued to place emphasis on cost-effective 
and reliable missile defenses that contribute to strategic 
stability. The committee conducted oversight on U.S. homeland 
missile defense development, focusing on the next generation 
interceptor program with provisions in both the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA), efforts to 
improve regional missile defense capabilities, developmental 
and operational testing, cyber security to protect Ballistic 
Missile Defense System (BMDS) data, force structure and 
inventory requirements, continued integration of ``left-of-
launch'' capabilities, and science and technology investments 
in areas such as boost-phase intercept, directed energy, space 
sensor layer, and continuous improvements to radar 
discrimination. The committee focused on the Department's plans 
to design and develop a hypersonic defense capability, and in 
addition to the technical and programmatic aspects, continued 
to refine national missile defense policy through a provision 
in Public Law 116-92 in light of these complex and emerging 
threats.
    The committee monitored implementation of the 2019 Missile 
Defense Review by the Department of Defense and opportunities 
to strengthen international missile defense cooperation with 
allies and partners to defend against ballistic and cruise 
missiles.
    The committee legislated on the roles, responsibilities, 
and acquisition policies of the Missile Defense Agency and 
military services as they relate to missile defense to ensure 
acquisition accountability and that investments in missile 
defense capability and capacity are addressing global combatant 
commander requirements.
    The committee continued oversight of the Army's Lower Tier 
Air and Missile Defense System modernization efforts, including 
the Patriot weapon system, the Lower Tier Air and Missile 
Defense Sensor (as that program transitions to a rapid 
prototyping effort), and efforts to improve interoperability of 
Army and BMDS systems. Public Law 116-92 included language that 
ensured the program had sound acquisition practices in place 
during the rapid prototyping effort, and that requirements were 
being met in accordance with operational needs.
    The committee monitored progress of the Department of 
Defense Conventional Prompt Strike hypersonic offensive efforts 
across both the Navy and Army programs as potential ``left-of-
launch'' capabilities. The committee initiated policy 
discussions and included provisions in both Public Law 116-92 
and the FY21 NDAA that required the Department to assess and 
address the risks of ambiguity, miscalculation, and unintended 
escalation of these types of weapons.

                        National Security Space

    The committee oversaw the national security space policies 
and programs of the Department of Defense, including combat 
support agencies and elements of the Department of Defense that 
are also part of the intelligence community. The committee 
continued its years-long focus on improving the organization 
and management of the Department's space program, and related 
policies, to posture the military to maintain our space 
advantage, address new threats in space, elevate the focus 
within the Department on space as a warfighting domain, and 
create a culture that recognizes the importance of space for 
national security. Toward this end, the committee was 
intrinsically involved in the establishment of the U.S. Space 
Force, building on earlier efforts in the House-passed National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 to establish a 
Space Corps, and ultimately establishing the U.S. Space Force 
as a separate military service within the Air Force in the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public 
Law 116-92). Public Law 116-92 also established a new Assistant 
Secretary for Space Policy to elevate space-related policy 
within the Department and established a new Assistant Secretary 
for Space Acquisition and Integration to increase focus on 
space acquisition.
    In an effort to support new space acquisition frameworks 
and to support the use of new commercial architectures and 
services, including the use of proliferated LEO architectures 
to enhance resilience, and to promote innovation for national 
security, the committee held a briefing in May 2019 on the 
mission and plans of the Space Development Agency (SDA). 
Further, the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) established 
the SDA in statute, mandating its transfer to the U.S. Space 
Force by October 2022. The FY21 NDAA again required the 
Department to submit a report and plan for a new space 
acquisition framework. In further support of innovation and 
resilience in space, the committee also held briefings on 
optimal future space architectures in January 2020 with Dr. 
Andrew Cox and on an update on Project Maven in support of the 
use of AI to inform and increase the speed of operational 
awareness and decisions.
    The committee also oversaw the establishment of the Space 
Command as a separate geographic combatant command, in support 
of increased focus on warfighter requirements, plans, and 
operations.
    The committee monitored current and expected foreign space 
threats, and focused on the need for development of effective 
deterrence policies for space. To this end, the committee held 
several classified briefings on space threats and adversary 
space capabilities in March 2019 and in September 2020, and 
Public Law 116-92 mandated an independent study to inform 
effective deterrence in space. Both Public Law 116-92 and the 
FY21 NDAA continued to press for measures to increase 
deterrence and capacity, for example mandating the development 
of terminals that can multi-global navigation satellite systems 
to add resilience to precision, navigation and timing 
capability and deter an attack on GPS space assets.
    Finally, the committee continued to support increased use 
of commercial capabilities, with both Public Law 116-92 and the 
FY21 NDAA including provisions to mandate the use of commercial 
capabilities with regard to space domain awareness. The FY21 
NDAA continued to support competition to ensure cost-effective 
assured access to space by mandating investments toward phase 3 
of the National Security Space Launch program, and included 
several provisions to support small launch capabilities.

 Navy and Marine Corps Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance 
                                Programs

    During the 116th Congress, the committee continued 
oversight efforts on the size, composition, capability, and 
capacity of the Department of Defense's maritime intelligence, 
surveillance, and reconnaissance aircraft force structure. The 
committee engaged the Department through classified and 
unclassified briefings to understand modernization and 
recapitalization strategy. The committee engaged the Navy to 
understand the recapitalization of the remaining P-3C Orion 
maritime patrol aircraft with the P-8 Poseidon aircraft. The 
committee continued to assess the risk in the Navy's current 
plan to maintain and procure the MQ-4 Triton supported by 
section 4101 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA).
    The committee also continued to provide oversight of the E-
2D Advanced Hawkeye Airborne Early Warning Command and Control 
aircraft as it gains inflight air refueling capability and 
continues to replace the E-2C Hawkeye. Advanced unmanned 
capability unclassified and classified briefings were held to 
support and understand the MQ-8B/C Firescout and new MUX/MALE 
capabilities for the Marine Corps.

       Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations and Electronic Warfare

    The committee continued oversight of the Department of 
Defense's developing Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations (EMSO) 
strategy and associated electronic warfare (EW) systems. The 
committee engaged with the EMSO Cross Functional Team and 
military service leaders to understand how the Department is 
identifying requirements, developing policies, and establishing 
the necessary governance structures to manage the EMSO 
enterprise. The committee focused on the Department's ability 
to address emerging EMSO and EW threats and the military 
services' efforts to develop and field next-generation 
capabilities to counter these threats. Specifically, the 
committee examined airborne EW systems, including the EC-130H 
Compass Call aircraft, the EC-37B Compass Call re-host 
aircraft, the Navy's Next Generation Jammer airborne electronic 
attack capability, and the Army's Multi-Function EW-Air, as 
well as ground-based EW capabilities including the Terrestrial 
Layer System.

                   Integrated Air and Missile Defense

    The committee conducted oversight on the research, 
development, and procurement of Army and Marine Corps tactical 
air and missile defense programs. Specifically, the committee 
examined the interim and enduring solutions for the Indirect 
Fire Protection Capability, the Integrated Battle Command 
System, and the Mobile-Short Range Air Defense capabilities.

           INTELLIGENCE AND EMERGING THREATS AND CAPABILITIES


                              Intelligence

    The committee recognizes the increasingly complex nature of 
warfare and the national security imperative of ensuring that 
the Defense Intelligence Enterprise is postured to balance 
intelligence support to National Defense Strategy priority 
challenges of confronting strategic competition and ongoing 
counterterrorism operations. Over the 116th Congress, the 
Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and 
Capabilities set and pursued an aggressive oversight and 
legislative agenda for the Defense Intelligence Enterprise. The 
subcommittee examined the current and planned modernization 
activities, with a focus on developments in machine learning 
and artificial intelligence, to ensure the Department of 
Defense is on track to continue creating current, informed 
foundational intelligence to support military operations, 
advanced weapon systems, and military planners.
    To that end, the subcommittee conducted multiple briefings 
and hearings with the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security 
(USD(I&S)), and the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center 
(JAIC), to monitor progress in the development and 
synchronization of artificial intelligence initiatives, 
including activities underway at the JAIC; the DIA's Machine-
assisted Analytic Rapid-repository System (MARS), which will 
ultimately underpin every aspect of military operations; and 
USD(I&S)'s Project Maven.
    The subcommittee examined the organization, functions, and 
operations of the Defense Intelligence Agency to ensure 
comprehensive, timely, and objective intelligence support to 
Department of Defense plans and operations. The subcommittee 
provided oversight into the formulation and execution of the 
military intelligence program. In accordance with section 3038 
of title 50, United States Code, the subcommittee scrutinized 
the management and execution of national intelligence program 
capabilities within Department activities to ensure these 
resources were adequate to satisfy the overall intelligence 
needs of the Department, and appropriately integrated with the 
intelligence activities of the Department.
    The subcommittee held numerous briefings on combatant 
command intelligence requirements, oversight processes, and 
resources. The subcommittee paid particular attention to these 
areas during closed, classified briefings, as well as numerous 
congressional delegations with members and professional staff. 
The subcommittee pursued an aggressive oversight plan to 
address intelligence gaps in assessing and predicting 
infectious disease outbreaks such as the novel coronavirus, as 
well as assessing and predicting extreme weather events to 
ensure military planners are able to capture that information 
to aid in military planning and operations.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 
(Public Law 116-92) contained a number of provisions aimed at 
ensuring the ability of the Department to efficiently manage 
security support services, including processing personnel 
security investigations, protecting sensitive and classified 
U.S. government information, and guarding against 
counterintelligence threats to sensitive national security 
information and technologies. The subcommittee examined the 
transition of the National Background Investigations Bureau to 
the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency. Public Law 
116-92 required the Defense Counterintelligence and Security 
Agency to submit on a semiannual basis a report outlining 
efforts to improve the quality of agency background 
investigation submissions, improve both the quality and 
timeliness of security clearances and other vetting requests 
across the Federal Government. Upon completion of a fulsome 
examination of the roles and missions of the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Intelligence, and to better reflect the 
responsibilities of the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Intelligence, Public Law 116-92 renamed the position to the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security.
    Through the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) and 
accompanying committee report (H. Rept. 116-442), the 
subcommittee took steps to address misinformation targeted at 
U.S. Armed Forces; established a Climate Security Roundtable to 
ensure the incorporation of artificial intelligence and machine 
learning into weather forecasting to enhance military 
intelligence surrounding climate change; and increased 
accountability of Department of Defense clandestine activities.
    Finally, the subcommittee conducted oversight of all 
intelligence organizations, programs, and activities of the 
Department of Defense in accordance with the committee's 
jurisdiction. The subcommittee coordinated, as appropriate, 
with the House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence on matters related to Department of Defense 
intelligence and counterintelligence activities in the course 
of oversight and the authorization of appropriations for 
intelligence activities shared by the two committees.

                         Science and Technology

    In the 116th Congress, the committee worked to ensure the 
Department of Defense continues to foster a robust and balanced 
science and technology (S&T) ecosystem comprised of agencies, 
offices, laboratories, federally funded research and 
development centers, university affiliated research centers, 
academic partnerships, test and evaluation entities, and 
partnerships with the private sector, including small 
businesses, in order to deliver the best capabilities to the 
warfighter in the near, mid, and long term. The Subcommittee on 
Intelligence and Emerging Threats and Capabilities conducted 
oversight of the Department's S&T activities to ensure planning 
and execution of investments were aligned with national 
strategies and other interagency efforts to maintain 
technological superiority. This included examination of the 
Department's S&T investments, which concerningly had less than 
zero percent real growth in the fiscal year 2021 President's 
budget request; the Department's efforts to advance 
technologies aligned with the National Defense Strategy (NDS) 
and the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and 
Engineering's (USD(R&E)'s) 11 modernization priorities; and how 
USD(R&E), the military services, and the many innovation 
organizations in the Department advanced these modernization 
priorities while protecting the important science and 
technology investments in next-generation innovations. The 
subcommittee continued its oversight of the performance of the 
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Defense Innovation 
Unit, and Strategic Capabilities Office, as well as other 
service-specific innovation centers and partnerships with 
private industry to ensure coordination, synchronization, 
transition of technology, and prudent use of fiscal resources.
    The subcommittee encouraged the Department to examine its 
S&T strategy and doctrine, concepts of employment, and other 
organizing concepts pursued by the military services and the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense, including how capabilities 
contribute to new security strategies; how they will be 
supported by rigorous technical analysis and relevant concepts 
of employment; and how the Department will develop plans to 
transition mature technologies to the field. For each of the 
rapid technological advancements outlined in the NDS, and the 
USD(R&E) modernization priorities, section 232 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92) tasked the Department to strategically develop policies on 
how the United States should use and deploy these future 
technologies, and how these emerging capabilities will 
contribute to new security strategies.
    Through Public Law 116-92 and the William M. (Mac) 
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2021 (FY21 NDAA), the committee granted dozens of authorities 
to improve the Department's S&T workforce; facilities; 
infrastructure; access to small businesses, academia, and the 
tech sector to champion in-house and extramural innovation for 
the future of force modernization, warfighting operational 
concepts, and acquisition. The subcommittee continued to 
encourage the Department to use the authorities that have been 
underutilized, and Public Law 116-92 required the Secretary of 
Defense to submit a master plan for implementation of 
authorities relating to science and technology reinvention 
laboratories. The FY21 NDAA includes 10 recommendations from 
the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, 
many focused on helping the Department attract, hire, and 
retain a strong technical workforce.
    Providing and maintaining the infrastructure, both digital 
and brick and mortar, is paramount to attracting the best 
talent. Section 252 of Public Law 116-92 required the Secretary 
to produce a master plan to support the Department's 
modernization requirements, including improvements for the 
science and technology reinvention laboratories and the 
facilities of the Major Range and Test Facility Base. 
Additionally, section 231 of Public Law 116-92 directed a 
digital engineering capability and pilot to provide testing 
infrastructure and software development platforms to support 
automated approaches for testing, evaluation, and deployment, 
and section 836 of the FY21 NDAA would direct the Secretary to 
iteratively develop and integrate advanced digital data 
management and analytics capabilities to use data to enable and 
inform further development and innovations in models and 
simulations, including innovations in automation, artificial 
intelligence, and software development.
    Ensuring the Department nurture its talent pipeline is 
vital to ensuring the Department and the nation's innovation 
base has the technical workforce it will need to strengthen the 
U.S. military's edge over the next few decades. The 
subcommittee continued its focus on science, technology, 
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education, and provided 
direction and authorities to the Department to diversify and 
strengthen the national security workforce. Section 262 of 
Public Law 116-92 directed a National Academies of Sciences 
study on elevating defense research at Historically Black 
Colleges and Universities and Other Minority Institutions 
(HBCU/MIs). The FY21 NDAA would encourage Department 
contractors to participate in STEM in elementary and secondary 
schools; enable the Secretary to provide financial assistance, 
scholarships, and fellowships for students at HBCU/MIs; direct 
a single organization to have primary responsibility for 
building cohesion and collaboration across the Department's 
various scholarship and employment programs; provide part-time 
and term employment for university professors and students 
working in the Defense S&T enterprise. The FY21 NDAA would also 
direct a study on how to better attract and retain highly 
qualified individuals for employment in DOD who have scientific 
or technical expertise in critical technologies and are 
involved with basic and applied research funded by the 
Department.
    Further, the current global COVID-19 pandemic underscores 
the importance of the subcommittee's oversight of S&T 
investments in countermeasures to adversary capabilities and 
emerging threats, such as infectious diseases, biotechnologies, 
and climate change. Section 263 of Public Law 116-92 directed a 
Defense Science Board study on emerging biotechnologies 
pertinent to national security. Section 278 of the FY21 NDAA 
would direct an assessment and direct comparison of the United 
States and its adversaries' capabilities in emerging 
biotechnologies for national security purposes, including 
applications in material, manufacturing, and health. Section 
1055 of the FY21 NDAA would reauthorize the National 
Oceanographic Partnership Program to promote the national goals 
of assuring national security, protecting quality of life, 
ensuring environmental stewardship, and strengthening science 
education and communication through improved knowledge of the 
ocean.

            Cyberspace Activities and Information Technology

    The committee recognizes the ever-increasing cyber threats 
facing the nation and the criticality of ensuring that the U.S. 
Armed Forces are postured to succeed in cyberspace. Over the 
116th Congress, the Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging 
Threats and Capabilities set and pursued an aggressive 
oversight and legislative agenda for cyber-related matters. 
This necessitated examination not only of the Department of 
Defense's operations and capabilities, but also to ensure the 
Department was not compartmentalizing its cyber forces and 
instead creating the necessary linkages between its cyber 
operations and operations in the other warfighting domains. 
Additionally, this effort requires that the Department is 
cognizant of and persistently collaborating with other 
departments and agencies of the executive branch, to include 
the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, Energy, and 
Health and Human Services. The subcommittee focused on ensuring 
that the Department of Defense adequately budgeted for and 
invested in cyber capabilities, and that these investments 
aligned correctly to the nation's strategic objectives.
    Through the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) and accompanying committee report 
(H. Rept. 116-333), the subcommittee emphasized measures to 
improve congressional oversight of the Department's actions, 
operations, policy and strategy towards cyberspace. This 
included provisions mandating a comprehensive framework for the 
Department's cybersecurity efforts in assisting the Defense 
Industrial Base, establishing a biannual reporting requirement 
for the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center, directing a 
Government Accountability Office study of the Department's 
inventory of Internet Protocol Version 4 addresses, and 
accounting for all of the Department's investments in 
cybersecurity education programs at the primary, secondary, and 
post-secondary levels. Additionally, Public Law 116-92 
contained provisions that refined the definitions and 
notification standards for sensitive military cyber operations, 
and directed a quadrennial cyber posture review.
    Through the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) and the 
accompanying conference report (H. Rept. 116-617), the 
subcommittee made significant headway, not only in improving 
the posture of the Department of Defense, but of the entire 
executive branch through oversight and legislation built on 
recommendations from the National Security Commission on 
Artificial Intelligence and the Cyberspace Solarium Commission. 
Key provisions in the FY21 NDAA include legislation addressing 
personnel management authority of the commander of U.S. Cyber 
Command, authority to expend operation and maintenance funds 
for cyber operations-peculiar capability development, 
strengthening the position of the Principal Cyber Advisor, and 
the authority to establish tailored cyberspace operations 
organizations within each of the military services. Most 
notably, the FY21 NDAA would establish a National Cyber 
Director, Presidentially appointed and Senate-confirmed, to 
serve as the principal advisor of the President on matters 
related to cyberspace and cybersecurity, and with a remit that 
spans the departments and agencies of the executive branch.

                         Information Operations

    The committee recognizes that engagement with foreign 
audiences and a refined understanding of the information 
environment is pivotal to navigating the 21st century global 
security environment. Whether influencing nation-state 
adversaries or countering propaganda efforts by violent 
extremist groups, or identifying and countering deception or 
disinformation events, strategic communication and information 
operations are critical elements to success in all domains.
    During the 116th Congress, the Subcommittee on Intelligence 
and Emerging Threats and Capabilities set and pursued an 
aggressive oversight and legislative agenda examining the 
Department of Defense's progress in developing and leveraging 
information operations (IO) as a means to counter state-
sponsored information warfare against those adversaries 
designated by the National Defense Strategy. Nation-state 
actors such as China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran are adept 
at disinformation campaigns and manipulation of the information 
environment. Violent extremist groups like Al Shabaab, Boko 
Haram, and the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria also leverage 
the information environment to accelerate the radicalization, 
and thus recruitment, of vulnerable groups and recruitment 
opportunities. These violent extremist groups rely upon social 
media and encrypted messaging services to plan, finance, and 
direct the execution of violent acts of terror.
    Both the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2020 (Public Law 116-92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 
NDAA) include provisions addressing these types of malign 
activities. Public Law 116-92 directed an annual report 
regarding the ongoing establishment of U.S. Special Operations 
Command's (USSOCOM's) Joint Military Information Support 
Operations (MISO) Web Operations Center, focusing on efforts to 
improve the effectiveness and efficiency of USSOCOM's MISO 
programs while ensuring coordination with the Department of 
State's Global Engagement Center to ensure synchronized, cogent 
information operations. Further, in the committee report 
accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2020 (H. Rept. 116-120), the committee directed the 
development of a comprehensive strategy for the development and 
execution of operations in the information environment while 
simultaneously scrutinizing the posture and resourcing of 
defense intelligence capabilities to sufficiently support such 
activities in the information environment. The FY21 NDAA builds 
on these efforts and would add training on foreign 
disinformation campaigns and studying cyber exploitation and 
online deception of members of the U.S. Armed Forces and their 
families.

    Protecting Critical Technology and National Security Information

    In the 116th Congress, the committee continued its 
oversight to ensure the Department of Defense implements 
policies that promote a sound economic, political, and 
strategic environment on U.S. soil where global collaboration, 
discovery, innovation, public institutions, and industry can 
all thrive. Though the open dialogue and debate of academia can 
be anathema to the secrecy relied on in the Department, it must 
recognize--and embrace--the competitive advantage America's 
free society provides us to out-innovate and develop better 
products faster. The United States free society and open, basic 
research environment focused on discovery for the United 
States--and the world--has, for the last several decades, 
allowed our American universities to undertake nothing less 
than a talent acquisition program for the U.S. economy.
    Through the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) and the William M. (Mac) 
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2021 (FY21 NDAA) the Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging 
Threats and Capabilities included numerous provisions to 
address the initiative to support protection of national 
security academic researchers from undue influence and other 
security threats initially included in section 1286 of the John 
S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2019 (Public Law 115-232). Section 1299C of the FY21 NDAA would 
completely replace and update section 1286 of Public Law 115-
232 to mandate the designation of a government official to act 
as an academic liaison to work with academia to develop and 
execute initiatives to protect Department-sponsored academic 
research from undue foreign influence and threats; clarify that 
the initiatives are intended to be developed and executed with 
all appropriate academic research institutions; mandate the 
establishment of requirements for briefings on espionage risks 
to appropriate senior academic officials; clarify requirements 
on the development of a list of foreign talent programs that 
pose a threat to U.S. national security interests; establish 
additional procedures, consistent with government best 
practices and overseen by the designated academic liaison, for 
enhanced information sharing between the government and 
academic institutions with respect to fundamental research 
programs; and mandate additional reporting on lists of academic 
institutions and foreign threat programs of concern to the 
Congress and the public.
    Additionally, the FY21 NDAA would create an interagency 
working group led by the Office of Science and Technology 
Policy and would direct a National Academies of Sciences-hosted 
roundtable with academia and others to tackle issues of foreign 
influence, cyber-attacks, theft, and espionage. Both teams were 
directed to develop best practices for Federal research 
agencies and grantees, while accounting for the importance of 
the open exchange of ideas and the international talent 
required for scientific progress and American leadership in 
science and technology. Additionally, the subcommittee 
partnered with the House of Representatives Committee on 
Science, Space, and Technology and Committee on Energy and 
Commerce, as well as with the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation and Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources to include a provision which would require disclosure 
of funding sources in applications for research and development 
awards from any Federal research agency.

                     Sensitive Military Operations

    Throughout the 116th Congress, the committee continued 
extensive oversight of sensitive military operations conducted 
by the Department of Defense outside of Afghanistan, Iraq, or 
Syria in accordance with section 130f of title 10, United 
States Code. As appropriate, oversight is conducted in 
classified forums.
    The Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and 
Capabilities focused particular attention to the legal, policy, 
operational, and funding authorities, including section 127e of 
title 10, United States Code, associated with such operations 
throughout the 116th Congress. In the William M. (Mac) 
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2021 (FY21 NDAA), the subcommittee modified the existing 
reporting requirements to ensure increased transparency and 
timely notifications to Congress regarding the transition or 
termination of any activities under said authority and directed 
a parallel review by the Comptroller General of the United 
States regarding the conduct of the 127e authority.
    The committee believes in the deliberate application of 
military force under the appropriate authorities and direction 
from the President and the Department of Defense. As such, the 
committee significantly enhanced oversight of military 
operations and activities by directing that the Department 
provide all execute orders upon request by the committee for 
review. Now codified in section 113 of title 10, United States 
Code, as directed by section 1744 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92), the 
Secretary of Defense must provide copies of each execute order 
upon request as well as a quarterly report identifying and 
summarizing all execute orders approved by the Secretary or the 
commander of a combatant command in effect for the Department 
of Defense as those operating principles framing military 
operations.
    In addition to enhancing oversight of those operating 
principles establishing military operations and activities, in 
the committee report accompanying the William M. (Mac) 
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2021 (H. Rept. 116-442), the committee also directed a 
comprehensive review and report by the Comptroller General of 
the United States to conduct a review of U.S. Special 
Operations Command's (USSOCOM's) structure and organization of 
those forces aligned or assigned to the command to increase 
transparency and understanding of USSOCOM's expanding force 
structure, to include the size and influence of the theater 
special operations commands (TSOCs).
    Further, building upon the policy to reduce the likelihood 
of civilian casualties resulting from military operations as 
included in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) and the John S. McCain National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-
232), the subcommittee continued oversight efforts by enhancing 
civilian casualty policy responsibilities within the Department 
and further directed the modification of reporting requirements 
related to such civilian casualty policies of the Department of 
Defense in Public Law 116-92 as a means to increase public 
transparency and focus accountability. Section 1721 of Public 
Law 116-92 further directed an independent review of Department 
of Defense standards, processes, procedures, and policy 
relating to civilian casualties resulting from United States 
military operations as a means to increase transparency and 
accountability of potential consequences resulting from 
military operations.
    The committee believes in the importance of the development 
of a professional and ethical force to successfully execute the 
missions required of special operations. Whether countering 
violent extremism or competing below the level of armed 
conflict with state actors, the committee recognizes that 
consistent, strong leadership is critical for the comportment 
of such an elite force, and thus, the subcommittee prioritized 
building upon the efforts of section 922 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328) to strengthen civilian oversight of special operations.
    The subcommittee also focused efforts on ensuring that 
USSOCOM acts upon the findings and implements the 
recommendations from the 2020 USSOCOM Comprehensive Review 
regarding the professionalism and ethics of special operations 
forces, directing regular updates on the status of such 
implementation in section 599 of the FY21 NDAA.

                           Irregular Warfare

    The committee acknowledges that malign nation-state actors 
and violent extremist groups employ both military and non-
military means such as surrogates, cyber operations, 
disinformation campaigns, and political bribes to accomplish 
their desired end states. These hybrid warfare tactics occur in 
that grey zone below the threshold of armed conflict, and 
require the U.S. Armed Forces to confront these malign actors 
through specialized operational authorities and unconventional 
activities.
    During the 116th Congress, the Subcommittee on Intelligence 
and Emerging Threats and Capabilities received briefings on the 
publication of the Irregular Warfare Annex to the 2018 National 
Defense Strategy, and conducted oversight engagements to better 
understand how U.S. Special Operations Command, with oversight 
of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations 
and Low Intensity Conflict (ASD SO/LIC), will adjust resources 
and capabilities to support the Department's efforts towards 
great power competition.
    The subcommittee conducted oversight of the Department of 
Defense's planning for and use of the operational authority 
provided by section 1202 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91). Section 1202 
provides the Department limited authority to provide support to 
foreign forces, irregular forces, groups, or individuals 
engaged in supporting or facilitating ongoing and authorized 
irregular warfare operations by U.S. special operations forces.
    In alignment with U.S. Special Operations Command's 
progress in prioritizing its great power competition mission 
with the need to maintain focus on countering violent 
extremism, the subcommittee authorized an extension for the use 
of the authority through 2023 in section 1207 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92). Further, after rigorous oversight and focused engagements 
with the Department, the subcommittee further authorized an 
increase in the resourcing specific to this authority while 
modifying reporting requirements to increase transparency 
regarding the partnered forces' adherence to human rights law 
in the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021.

                 Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction

    Over the past few years, both Russia and North Korea 
employed chemical weapon nerve agents. In Syria, pro-regime and 
Islamic State of Iraq and Syria forces used chemical weapons on 
civilian populations to achieve their tactical and strategic 
objectives. Advances in biotechnology, gene sequencing, gene 
editing, and synthetic biology have lowered the barriers of 
entry for countries and individuals acting with nefarious 
intent--or even just by chance--to produce biological agents in 
a scope and scale not previously encountered. These and other 
advances exacerbate the complexity of the world's weapons of 
mass destruction (WMD) threats, and the United States ability 
to counter them.
    During the 116th Congress, and in a time when the world is 
struggling to respond to the rapid spread of the highly 
infectious COVID-19 pandemic, the Subcommittee on Intelligence 
and Emerging Threats and Capabilities focused on efforts of the 
organizations under its oversight to advance the collective 
fight against the virus. The subcommittee held multiple 
briefings with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency 
(DARPA), the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), and the 
Chemical Biological Defense Program (CBDP) on their efforts to 
provide treatments, vaccines, tests for diagnoses, and other 
technologies to address the impact of the virus. The 
subcommittee supported the increase of CARES Act funding for 
DARPA to surge on pandemic response, and encouraged the CBDP to 
be a key partner in the fight against COVID-19. DARPA worked, 
as it did for Ebola, to develop and deliver technologies and 
medical countermeasures to ensure that our military can 
maintain operational readiness. CBDP's Medical Program funds 
and manages efforts to develop medical countermeasures, 
vaccines, therapeutics, and pre-treatments. Similarly, the 
Physical Program funds and manages efforts to develop 
surveillance and detection technologies, diagnostics, personal 
protective equipment, and decontamination systems. To prepare 
against potential unknown threats, CBDP built expertise and 
capabilities to address novel pathogens, which made it an ideal 
program to support the fight against the novel coronavirus.
    The Defense Threat Reduction Agency, through its execution 
of the Department of Defense's Cooperative Threat Reduction 
(CTR) Biological Threat Reduction Program (BTRP) and its 
Technical Reachback Analysis Cell, received foreign partner 
requests for preparedness and detection including providing 
biosafety, biosecurity, and bio-surveillance support to aid in 
detection, diagnosis, reporting, and modeling related to the 
COVID-19 outbreak. There were many good examples of BTRP-
trained local professionals in countries like Guinea, Liberia, 
Cape Verde, Jordan, and Thailand who diagnosed and confirmed 
the first cases of COVID-19 in their countries. Despite these 
successes, the fiscal year 2021 President's budget request 
drastically slashed the CTR program by over one-third, and the 
subcommittee worked to ensure that the William M. (Mac) 
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2021 (FY21 NDAA) would restore over $120.0 million to this 
important effort.
    Indeed, the current coronavirus outbreak and global 
pandemic underscores the importance of scientific research and 
preparedness across the interagency for our national and 
economic security. To that end, in the committee report 
accompanying the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (H. Rept. 116-442), the 
subcommittee directed the Comptroller General of the United 
States to assess the Department's strategy and planning for 
research and development and for emerging threats, and 
particularly biological threats, and for incorporating those 
threats into broader planning and exercise mechanisms.
    The subcommittee partnered with the House Committee on 
Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific, and 
Nonproliferation to jointly host a hearing on biosecurity this 
fall while the COVID-19 pandemic was worsening across the 
United States. Section 1299I of the FY21 NDAA would direct the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of 
State, to enter into an arrangement with the National Academy 
of Sciences to conduct an assessment of the United States 
strategies for preventing, countering, and responding to 
nuclear, biological, and chemical terrorism. The subcommittee 
partnered with the House Committee on Oversight and Reform and 
Committee on Energy and Commerce, and the many corresponding 
Senate committees to include section 364 of the FY21 NDAA, 
which would require all relevant departments and agencies to 
review and update the National Biodefense Implementation Plan. 
Additionally, section 363 of the FY21 NDAA would improve 
oversight of Federal biodefense programs by requiring the 
Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the 
Secretary of Health and Human Services to provide integrated 
biodefense budget submissions and comprehensive analysis of all 
Federal biodefense programs annually.
    Regarding the concern as to whether U.S. forces are 
prepared for a significant state-level WMD event, and are 
trained and equipped to successfully operate and perform in a 
contaminated environment, section 1259 of the FY21 NDAA would 
require the Secretary of Defense to implement the Government 
Accountability Office recommendations on the preparedness of 
U.S. forces to counter North Korean chemical and biological 
weapons. The subcommittee also pushed on whether U.S. Forces 
Korea planners have access to the relevant intelligence on 
North Korean chemical and biological weapons sites needed to 
effectively plan--and if necessary, conduct--counter-WMD 
operations.

         ADDITIONAL OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES OF THE FULL COMMITTEE


                 Full Committee Hearings and Briefings

    During the 116th Congress, the committee held a series of 
budget posture hearings and briefings in preparation for the 
fiscal year 2020 and fiscal year 2021 budgets. The hearings and 
briefings, combined with the committee's responsibility for 
assembling the annual defense authorization bill, are a central 
element in the discharge of the committee's oversight 
responsibilities. In upholding its responsibilities to mitigate 
waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement of Federal Government 
programs, and pursuant to House rule XI, clause 2(n), (o), and 
(p), the committee met several times to conduct oversight of 
Department of Defense activities, as noted elsewhere in this 
report.
    The committee convened a hearing on March 26, 2019, to 
receive testimony from the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of 
the Joint Chiefs of Staff on the fiscal year 2020 budget 
request. To further inform its consideration of the fiscal year 
2020 budget request, the committee held hearings on April 2, 
2019 and on April 10, 2019 with military senior leaders to 
inform members of the state of the military. Additionally, the 
committee convened a hearing to ascertain from members of 
Congress their national defense priorities for the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, which took 
place on April 3, 2019. Following these budget hearings, on May 
16, 2019, the committee convened a hearing to receive testimony 
from the Comptroller of each branch of the military about the 
Financial Improvement and Audit Remediation Plan at the 
Department of Defense.
    To inform its consideration of the fiscal year 2021 budget 
request, the committee received testimony from the Secretary of 
Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on 
February 26, 2020. Receiving testimony from the Secretaries of 
the military departments during three hearings on February 27, 
2020, March 3, 2020, and March 4, 2020 further updated the 
committee about and detailed the fiscal year 2021 budget 
request.
    The committee sought to continually update members on U.S. 
relations and policy around the world, to tailor the 
committee's oversight and agenda. Topics included overviews of 
national security challenges in the Greater Middle East, 
Africa, Europe, the Indo-Pacific Region, and South America. In 
keeping with the committee's goal and record to be proactive in 
addressing threats and strategy, the committee convened a 
series of hearings and briefings throughout the 116th Congress 
to examine approaches to counterterrorism, nuclear deterrence 
policy and posture, the role of allies and partners in U.S. 
military strategy and operations, and the U.S. military mission 
in Afghanistan and the implication of the Peace Process on U.S. 
involvement. Competition was specifically addressed in hearings 
on the Department of Defense's roles in competing with China 
and long-term major state competition. Hearings focused on 
other policies ranged from the Department of Defense's support 
to the Southern Border to authorities and roles related to 
civilian law enforcement.
    To better understand strategic reassurance and deterrence 
activities across the globe, the committee also held frequent 
briefings to receive intelligence and operational updates on 
threat developments. These briefings informed the committee of 
policies toward Iran and security updates on the Korean 
Peninsula, Africa, coalition service members in Afghanistan and 
ISIS in Iraq and Syria. They also informed the committee's 
legislative initiatives in readiness, capabilities, 
infrastructure, and technology oversight to ensure that the 
U.S. Armed Forces remain capable of addressing current and 
emerging conventional and unconventional threats.
    In 2020, to address the COVID-19 pandemic, the committee 
met in person and remotely to hear testimony from Department of 
Defense officials. Hearings informed members of the Department 
of Defense COVID-19 response to defense industrial base 
challenges, the COVID-19 pandemic response from the Department 
of the Navy, the leverage of the Defense Production Act and 
supporting the Defense Industrial base during the pandemic, the 
Department of Defense's update on COVID-19 testing, research, 
and vaccine development, the Defense Intelligence Agency's 
National Center for Medical Intelligence on COVID-19, the 
Department of Defense and Defense Logistics Agency 
participation in the whole of government response to COVID-19, 
and how the Department of Defense is providing force protection 
during the COVID-19 pandemic.
    In response to advanced technology development and the 
changing global landscape of defense, the committee established 
the Future of Defense Task Force in October 2019. The Task 
Force held events to address theories of victory and innovative 
concepts for national security, supercharging the innovation 
base, biosecurity, Chinese research and development, and 
unidentified aerial phenomena.

                            Budget Oversight

    On March 13, 2019, the chairman of the Committee on Armed 
Services forwarded his views and estimates regarding the budget 
request for the National Defense Budget Function (050) for 
Fiscal Year 2020 to the Committee on the Budget.
    As requested by the chairman of the Budget Committee, the 
committee outlined its legislative priorities for the upcoming 
year. The committee noted that the annual National Defense 
Authorization Act contained all the essential authorities 
required to sustain our military and is the chief mechanism 
through which Congress exercises its Article I, Section 8 
responsibilities. The committee announced its intent to enact a 
national defense authorization bill for fiscal year 2020 as it 
had for 58 consecutive years. However, the committee noted with 
concern that the enactment of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 
provided for increases in discretionary spending levels for 
2018 and 2019, but sequestration levels remained in effect for 
fiscal years 2020 and 2021. The committee expressed support for 
an increase in Budget Control Act caps in order to advance the 
country's interests across the full range of policy, but 
stressed that increases to national defense spending should be 
part of a comprehensive approach that included an end to 
sequestration across all budget functions, increased revenues, 
and a return to regular order in the appropriations process. 
The committee identified that it will continue the practice of 
conducting a significant number of hearings, briefings, and 
roundtable discussions in order to better understand the 
current security environment, evaluate proposals for reform, 
and receive independent feedback on the military requirements 
necessary to support a robust strategy. The committee's ranking 
member did not join the chairman in his views and estimates.
    On March 23, 2020, the chairman of the Committee on Armed 
Services forwarded his views and estimates regarding the budget 
request for the National Defense Budget Function (050) for 
Fiscal Year 2021 to the Committee on the Budget. At the time, 
the President had announced a topline of $740.5 billion for 
fiscal year 2021 discretionary budget authority for national 
defense. This budget submission complied with the limitations 
mandated by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019 (Public Law 116-
37).
    As requested by the chairman of the Budget Committee, the 
committee outlined its legislative priorities for the upcoming 
year. As in the prior year, the committee noted that the annual 
National Defense Authorization Act contained all the essential 
authorities required to sustain our military and is the chief 
mechanism through which Congress exercises its Article I, 
Section 8 responsibilities. Likewise, the committee announced 
its intent to enact a national defense authorization bill for 
fiscal year 2021 as it had for the preceding 59 consecutive 
years. The committee identified that it will continue the 
practice of conducting a significant number of hearings, 
briefings, and roundtable discussions in order to better 
understand the current security environment, evaluate proposals 
for reform, and receive independent feedback on the military 
requirements necessary to support a robust strategy. The 
committee's ranking member did not join the chairman in his 
views and estimates.

  ADDITIONAL OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEES AND TASK FORCE


   Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and Capabilities

    The Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and 
Capabilities conducted additional oversight of specific issues 
across the portfolio, most notably issues pertaining to 
civilian casualties resulting from U.S. military operations; 
pandemic preparedness; U.S. capabilities to counter unmanned 
aircraft systems; 5G development and spectrum management; 
matters pertaining to artificial intelligence and machine 
learning, working closely with the National Security Commission 
on Artificial Intelligence; and a comprehensive effort to 
synchronize cyber policy, in partnership with the Cyber 
Solarium Commission.
    The subcommittee considered and reported dozens of 
legislative provisions in the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92), and the William 
M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA). The FY21 NDAA would direct an 
acceleration of developments in capabilities to counter 
unmanned aircraft systems to ensure the protection of U.S. 
Armed Forces; provide comprehensive reform to accelerate 5G 
communications development by the Department; included 10 
recommendations from the National Security Commission on 
Artificial Intelligence; creates a National Cyber Director to 
ensure the Executive Branch is synchronizes to defense our 
critical infrastructure. In the conference report accompanying 
the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (H. Rept. 116-617), the conferees 
directed the Government Accountability Office to conduct an 
assessment of the capabilities and capacity of the National 
Center for Medical Intelligence to effectively forecast or warn 
of foreign health threats.
    A formal list of the Subcommittee on Intelligence and 
Emerging Threats and Capabilities is provided below:
    On February 7, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``Long-Range Emerging Threats Facing the United 
States: Implications for National Security.''
    On February 26, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``Department of Defense Information Technology, 
Cybersecurity, and Information Assurance.''
    On February 28, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on the ``Cyber Mission Force and Military Operations 
in Cyberspace: A Framework for Oversight.''
    On March 7, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on the ``Department of Defense's Protecting Critical Technology 
Task Force.''
    On March 13, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on the ``Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request for U.S. 
Cyber Command and Operations in Cyberspace.''
    On March 28, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on the ``Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request for 
Department of Defense Science and Technology Programs: 
Maintaining a Robust Ecosystem for Our Technological Edge.''
    On April 3, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on ``Reviewing Department of Defense Strategy, Policy, and 
Programs for Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction for Fiscal 
Year 2020.''
    On April 9, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on the ``Evolution, Transformation, and Sustainment: A Review 
of the Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request for U.S. Special 
Operations Forces and Command.''
    On May 9, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive a 
classified briefing on the ``Counterterrorism Quarterly.''
    On September 10, 2019, the Subcommittee met, in 
coordination with the House Oversight Committee, Subcommittee 
on National Security, to receive testimony on ``Securing the 
Nation's Internet Architecture.''
    On September 26, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
classified briefing on the ``Counterterrorism Quarterly.''
    On October 16, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony, in coordination with the Subcommittee on Readiness, 
on ``Resiliency of Military Installations to Emerging 
Threats.''
    On October 31, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive a 
classified briefing on ``Cyber Operations Quarterly.''
    On November 13, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive a 
classified briefing on ``Fifth Generation (5G) Information and 
Communications Technologies.''
    On December 11, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``Climate Change in the Era of Strategic 
Competition.''
    On January 9, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a 
classified briefing on ``Cyber Operations Quarterly.''
    On January 30, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a 
classified briefing on ``Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems.''
    On February 11, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``Reviewing Department of Defense Strategy, 
Policy, and Programs for Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction 
for Fiscal Year 2021.''
    On February 6, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a 
classified briefing on ``Counterterrorism Quarterly.''
    On February 26, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a 
classified briefing on ``National Defense Strategy: Emerging 
Threats, Capabilities, and Investments.''
    On March 4, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on the ``Fiscal Year 2021 Budget Request for U.S. Cyber Command 
and Operations in Cyberspace.''
    On March 5, 2020, the subcommittee received a classified 
briefing on ``Manda Bay.''
    On March 11, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``Reviewing Department of Defense Science and 
Technology Strategy, Policy, and Programs for Fiscal Year 2021: 
Maintaining a Robust Ecosystem for Our Technological Edge.''
    On April 9, 2020, the subcommittee received a briefing from 
the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency regarding the 
``COVID-19 Pandemic.''
    On April 17, 2020, the subcommittee held a briefing on 
``Censored Contagion: How Information on the Coronavirus is 
Managed.''
    On April 30, 2020, the subcommittee held a briefing on 
``Defense Threat Reduction Agency in the COVID-19 Pandemic.''
    On June 11, 2020, the subcommittee received a briefing on 
the ``Air Force Venture Program.''
    On July 30, 2020, the subcommittee held a hearing to 
receive testimony on ``Review of the Recommendations of the 
Cyberspace Solarium Commission.''
    On September 17, 2020, the subcommittee held a hearing to 
receive testimony on ``Interim Review of the National Security 
Commission on Artificial Intelligence Effort and 
Recommendations.''
    On October 2, 2020, the subcommittee held a hearing, in 
coordination with the House Foreign Affairs Committee 
Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific, and Non-proliferation, to 
receive testimony on ``Strengthening Biological Security: 
Traditional Threats and Emerging Challenges.''
    On November 19, 2020, the subcommittee held a briefing on 
``Department of Defense IT Requirements in the COVID-19 
Pandemic.''
    On December 4, 2020, the subcommittee held a briefing on 
``Fifth Generation (5G) Information and Communications 
Technologies.''
    In addition to these events, the subcommittee's plans for 
hearings on ``Department of Defense Information Technology, 
Cybersecurity, and Information Assurance'' and ``FY21 Budget 
Request for Special Operations Command'' were cancelled as a 
result of COVID-19 impacts on congressional operations. In lieu 
of hearings, the subcommittee received formal written testimony 
from Special Operations Command and held a remote 
teleconference briefing with the Department's Chief Information 
Officer.

                   Subcommittee on Military Personnel

    The Subcommittee on Military Personnel continued oversight 
of military personnel, military personnel policy, the Military 
Health System, family programs, as well military pay and 
compensation. The hearings and briefings held by the 
subcommittee directly informed its oversight, legislative 
provisions, and authorization of appropriations included in the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public 
Law 116-92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021. A list of 
formal subcommittee events is provided below:
    On February 13, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on the military service academies' action plans to 
address the results of the sexual assault and violence report 
at the military service academies.
    On February 27, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on transgender service in the military policy.
    On March 12, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on outside perspectives on military personnel policy.
    On March 27, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on reserve component duty status reform.
    On April 2, 2019 the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on examining the role of the commander in sexual assault 
prosecutions.
    On April 30, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on the Feres doctrine and whether it is a policy in 
need of reform.
    On May 16, 2019 the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on military personnel management.
    On May 21, 2019, the subcommittee met jointly with the 
Subcommittee on Health of the House Committee on Veterans' 
Affairs to receive testimony on understanding the problem of 
military and veteran suicide and preparing for the future.
    On June 4, 2019, the subcommittee met to mark-up H.R. 2500, 
to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2020 for military 
activities of the Department of Defense and for military 
construction, to prescribe military personnel strengths for 
such fiscal year, and for other purposes.
    On September 18, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on shattered families, shattered service: taking 
military domestic violence out of the shadows.
    On October 23, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive a 
briefing from enlisted spouses on financial literacy and 
military family support.
    On October 30, 2019, the subcommittee met jointly with the 
Subcommittee on Technology Modernization of the House Committee 
on Veterans' Affairs to receive a briefing on the Electronic 
Health Record program.
    On December 5, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on Military Health System reform.
    On December 10, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on diversity in recruiting and retention and 
increasing diversity in the military.
    On February 5, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on the Exceptional Family Member Program.
    On February 11, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on incidents of white supremacy in the military.
    On May 19, 2020, the subcommittee received a briefing on 
the Army's ENGAGE program and preventing military suicide.
    On May 21, 2020, the subcommittee received a briefing from 
outside experts on the Department of Defense's response to the 
COVID-19 pandemic.
    On June 16, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on racial disparity in the military justice system.
    On June 23, 2020, the subcommittee met to mark-up H.R. 
6395, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2021 for 
military activities of the Department of Defense and for 
military construction, to prescribe military personnel 
strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes.
    On July 23, 2020, the subcommittee received a briefing on 
the Army Criminal Investigation Command's investigation into 
the SPC Vanessa Guillen case.
    On July 29, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on the military's #MeToo moment: an examination of sexual 
harassment and perceived retaliation in the Department of 
Defense and at Fort Hood.
    On September 11, 2020, the subcommittee received a briefing 
from the Department of Defense and outside experts on the 
Department's response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
    On December 9, 2020, the subcommittee received testimony on 
the findings and recommendations of the Fort Hood Independent 
Review Committee.

                       Subcommittee on Readiness

    The Subcommittee on Readiness continued oversight of 
military readiness, training, logistics, and maintenance 
issues; military construction, installations, shipyard repair 
facilities, and family housing issues; energy and environmental 
policy and programs of the Department of Defense; and civilian 
personnel and service contracting issues. The hearings and 
briefings held by the subcommittee directly informed 
subcommittee oversight, legislative provisions, and 
authorization of appropriations included in the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92) and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021. A list of formal 
subcommittee events is provided below:
    On February 6, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified 
briefing on ``How Readiness is Assessed and the Current State 
of Military Readiness.''
    On February 14, 2019, the subcommittee held a roundtable 
with military spouses to hear of their experiences and concerns 
with privatized military family housing.
    On February 26, 2019, the subcommittee, along with the 
Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, met to receive 
testimony on ``Naval Surface Forces Readiness: Are Navy Reforms 
Adequate?''
    On March 13, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``Ensuring Resiliency of Military Installations 
and Operations in Response to Climate Changes.''
    On March 27, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified 
briefing on ``DOD's Joint Logistics Enterprise and Future 
Concerns for Survivable Combat Logistics.''
    On April 4, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on ``Mismanaged Military Family Housing Programs: What is the 
Recovery Plan?''
    On May 1, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on ``Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request for Military Construction, 
Energy, and Environmental Programs.''
    On May 9, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on ``Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request for Military Readiness.''
    On July 26, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified 
briefing on the Quarterly Readiness Report to Congress.
    On September 26, 2019, the subcommittee met for a briefing 
on ``Ground Vehicle Mishaps: Causes, Effects and Solutions.''
    On October 16, 2019, the subcommittee, along with the 
Subcommittee on Intelligence, Emerging Threats and 
Capabilities, met to receive testimony on ``Resiliency of 
Military Installations to Emerging Threats.''
    On October 22, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``Ship and Submarine Maintenance: Cost and 
Schedule Challenges.''
    On November 13, 2019, the subcommittee, along with the 
Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces, met to receive 
testimony on ``F-35 Program Update: Sustainment, Production, 
and Affordability Challenges.''
    On November 14, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive a 
briefing on ``Security Clearances: How Reforms May Improve the 
Process.''
    On November 21, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``The Department of Defense Organic Industrial 
Base: Challenges, Solutions and Readiness Impacts.''
    On December 5, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``Privatized Housing: Are Conditions Improving for 
Our Military Families?''
    On January 14, 2020, the subcommittee, along with the 
Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces, received a 
briefing on the ``F-35 Program and Sustainment Update.''
    On February 5, 2020, the subcommittee, along with the 
Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, met to receive 
testimony on ``Update on Navy and Marine Corps Readiness in the 
Pacific in the Aftermath of Recent Mishaps.''
    On February 7, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a 
classified briefing on the Quarterly Readiness Report to 
Congress.
    On February 12, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``Land Based Ranges: Building Military Readiness 
While Protecting Natural and Cultural Resources.''
    On March 3, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on the ``FY21 Air Force and Space Force Readiness Posture.''
    On March 11, 2020, the subcommittee, along with the 
Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, met to receive 
testimony on ``U.S. Transportation Command and Maritime 
Administration: State of the Mobility Enterprise.''
    On March 12, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on the ``FY21 Navy and Marine Corps Readiness 
Posture.''
    On May 20, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a briefing 
on ``COVID-19 Impacts on Military Training and Readiness.''
    On May 28, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a briefing 
on ``COVID-19 Impacts on Shipyard and Depot Operations and 
Production.''
    On July 28, 2020, the subcommittee, along with the 
Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, met to receive 
a briefing on the Fire Aboard USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD-6).
    On September 15, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``Addressing the Legacy of Department of Defense 
Use of PFAS: Protecting Our Communities and Implementing 
Reform.''
    On October 1, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a 
briefing on ``Contested Logistics Requirements in Support of 
the National Defense Strategy.''
    On December 3, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a 
briefing on ``the Findings and Recommendations of the National 
Commission on Military Aviation Safety.''
    In addition to these formal events, the committee's plans 
for hearings on the ``FY21 Army Readiness Posture'' and ``FY21 
Energy, Installations, and Environment Posture'' were cancelled 
as a result of COVID-19 impacts on congressional operations. In 
lieu of hearings, the subcommittee received written statements 
from the witnesses and exchanged a series of questions for the 
record that were responded to in writing.

             Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces

    The Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces provided 
oversight of the Department of the Navy, the Department of the 
Air Force and the Department of the Army. The subcommittee held 
multiple hearings and briefings with officials from each of the 
military services. The subcommittee oversaw Navy shipbuilding 
programs which included new acquisition vessels as well as the 
modernization of existing fleet vessels. Oversight of Navy non-
tactical aviation was also provided. In its oversight of the 
Air Force, the subcommittee oversaw the acquisition and 
modernization of all aerial refueling aircraft, bomber aircraft 
and tactical and strategic aircraft. Finally, the subcommittee 
provided oversight of the Army's watercraft fleet. A list of 
formal subcommittee events is provided below:
    On February 14, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified 
briefing on ``Sealift ad Airlift Requirements Review.''
    On February 26, 2019, the subcommittee, along with the 
Subcommittee on Readiness, met to receive testimony on ``Naval 
Surface Forces Readiness: Are Navy Reforms Adequate?''
    On February 27, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified 
briefing on ``U.S. Air Force 101.''
    On March 7, 2019, the subcommittee, along with the 
Subcommittee on Readiness, met to receive testimony on ``U.S. 
Transportation Command and Maritime Administration: State of 
the Mobility Enterprise.''
    On March 14, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``Department of the Air Force Fiscal Year 2020 
Budget Request for Seapower and Projection Forces.''
    On March 26, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``Department of the Navy Fiscal Year 2020 Budget 
Request for Seapower and Projection Forces.''
    On April 30, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified 
briefing on ``Navy Force Structure Assessment and Navy and 
Marine Corps: How We Fight.''
    On May 8, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified 
briefing on ``B-21 Program and Budget Briefing.''
    On September 26, 2019, the subcommittee met for a 
classified briefing on ``The National Reconnaissance Office.''
    On November 13, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified 
briefing on ``Building the Bomber and Mobility Force the Air 
Force Needs.''
    On November 20, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified 
briefing on ``Aircraft Carrier Force Structure: Update on In 
Service and New Construction Aircraft Carriers.''
    On January 29, 2020, the subcommittee met for a briefing on 
``Sealift Turbo Activation Exercise Briefing.''
    On February 5, 2020, the subcommittee, along with the 
Readiness Subcommittee, met to receive testimony on ``Update on 
Navy and Marine Corps Readiness in the Pacific in the Aftermath 
of Recent Mishaps.''
    On February 27, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``Air Force Projection Forces Aviation Programs 
and Capabilities Related to the 2021 President's Budget.''
    On March 4, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on ``Department of the Navy Fiscal Year 2021 Budget Request for 
Seapower and Projection Forces.''
    On March 11, 2020, the subcommittee, along with the 
Subcommittee on Readiness, met to receive testimony on 
``Sealift and Mobility Requirements in Support of the National 
Defense Strategy.''
    On May 29, 2020, the subcommittee met for a briefing on 
``The Maritime Security Program.''
    On June 4, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on ``Future Force Structure Requirements for the United States 
Navy.''
    On July 28, 2020, the subcommittee, along with the 
Subcommittee on Readiness, met for a briefing on ``The Fire 
Aboard USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD-6).''

                    Subcommittee on Strategic Forces

    The Subcommittee on Strategic Forces continued oversight of 
Department of Defense and Department of Energy policy related 
to strategic deterrence, strategic stability, nuclear weapons, 
strategic and nuclear arms control, nonproliferation, nuclear 
safety, missile defense, and space; Department of Defense 
programs and accounts related to nuclear weapons, strategic 
missiles, nuclear command and control systems, Department of 
Defense intelligence space, space systems and services of the 
military departments, and intermediate and long-range missile 
defense systems; and Department of Energy national security 
programs and accounts. In total, the Subcommittee held a total 
of 23 formal hearings and briefings during the 116th Congress. 
These hearings and briefings directly informed subcommittee 
oversight, legislative provisions, and authorization of 
appropriations included in the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) and the William M. 
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2021. A formal list of subcommittee events is provided 
below:
    On February 14, 2019, the subcommittee, along with members 
of the full committee, met for a classified briefing update on 
the ``Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) Program.''
    On February 26, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``INF Withdrawal and the Future of Arms Control: 
Implications for the Security of the United States and its 
Allies.''
    On March 14, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified 
briefing on space threats.
    On March 28, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``Fiscal Year 2020 Priorities for Department of 
Defense Nuclear Activities.''
    On April 3, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on ``Fiscal Year 2020 Priorities for National Security Space 
Programs.''
    On April 9, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on ``Fiscal Year 2020 Priorities for Atomic Energy Defense, 
Nonproliferation, Safety, and Environmental Management.''
    On May 8, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on ``Fiscal Year 2020 Priorities for Missile Defense and 
Missile Defeat Programs.''
    On May 15, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified 
briefing on ``Space Development Agency and plans to improve 
resilience and deterrence in space.''
    On September 20, 2019, the subcommittee met for a 
classified briefing on the ``Redesigned Kill Vehicle Re-plan.''
    On September 25, 2019, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``Status of the B61-12 Life Extension and W88 
Alteration-370 Programs.''
    On October 30, 2019, the subcommittee met for a classified 
briefing on ``Strategic Forces related to Turkey.''
    On November 19, 2020, the subcommittee received a 
classified briefing on Russia and China's nuclear forces and 
views on nuclear deterrence and strategic stability.''
    On January 8, 2020, the subcommittee received a classified 
briefing on the ``Next Generation Interceptor.''
    On January 20, 2020, the subcommittee met for a classified 
briefing on the ``Space security study on future space 
architectures.''
    On February 6, 2020, the subcommittee met for a classified 
briefing on ``Open Skies Treaty flight execution and future 
plans.''
    On February 27, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on ``Fiscal Year 2021 Strategic Forces Posture.''
    On March 3, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive testimony 
on ``FY21 Budget Request for Nuclear Forces and Atomic Energy 
Defense Activities.''
    On March 12, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive 
testimony on the ``FY21 Budget Request for Missile Defense and 
Missile Defeat Programs.''
    On June 4, 2020, the subcommittee met for a briefing on the 
``Next Generation Interceptor.''
    On September 17, 2020, the subcommittee met for a 
classified briefing on ``Russian space threats.''
    On November 17, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a 
classified briefing on ``Update from the Department of Defense 
on Project Maven.''
    On December 7 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a 
classified briefing update on ``Conventional Prompt Strike 
Program.''
    On December 9, 2020, the subcommittee met to receive a 
classified briefing update on ``Chinese Nuclear Weapons 
Programs.''
    In addition to these events, the subcommittee cancelled 
hearings on ``FY2021 Priorities for National Security Space 
Programs'' and ``FY2021 Priorities for Atomic Energy Defense, 
Nonproliferation, Safety and Environmental Management'' due to 
COVID-19 implications on Committee operations.

              Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces

    The Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces provided 
oversight of the Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, 
and the Office of the Secretary of Defense acquisition programs 
providing tactical aircraft and missiles; armor and ground 
vehicles; munitions; rotorcraft; individual equipment to 
include tactical networks and radios and personal protective 
equipment; counter improvised explosive device equipment; 
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance platforms to 
include unmanned aerial systems, and associated support 
equipment, including National Guard and Reserve equipment 
programs. The Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces also 
provided oversight on policy, such as threats and force 
structure requirements, as appropriate within the 
subcommittee's jurisdiction. This included current or future 
acquisition programs that relate to gaps in the capabilities 
required to execute current national military strategies, as 
well as the allocation of acquisition resources. This also 
included military-service specific acquisition responsibilities 
and authorities directly relating to the subcommittee's 
jurisdiction. The subcommittee also participated in oversight 
of the management of industrial base concerns during the COVID-
19 pandemic.
    The subcommittee conducted three oversight hearings during 
its consideration of the fiscal year 2020 budget request, 
including the following: April 4, 2019: ``Navy and Marine Corps 
Tactical Aviation and Ground Modernization''; May 1, 2019: 
``Fiscal Year 2020 Department of the Army Modernization 
Programs''; and May 2, 2019: ``Department of the Air Force 
Acquisition and Modernization Programs in the Fiscal Year 2020 
National Defense Authorization President's Budget Request''.
    Despite the challenges of restrictions to scheduling and 
in-person activities due to the COVID-19 pandemic through most 
of 2020, the subcommittee conducted two oversight hearings 
during its consideration of the fiscal year 2021 budget 
request, including the following: March 5, 2020: ``Fiscal Year 
2021 Army and Marine Corps Ground Systems Modernization 
Programs''; and March 10, 2020: ``Department of Defense 
Tactical and Rotary Aircraft Acquisition and Modernization 
Programs in the FY21 President's Budget Request''.
    In addition to oversight hearings, the subcommittee held 
various briefings and events to conduct oversight, including 
classified briefings: February 26, 2019: ``Overview of Army 
Threat Assessment, Requirements, and Acquisition for Aviation 
and Combat Vehicles''; March 6, 2019: ``An Introductory 
Overview of the U.S. Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps Tactical 
Aviation Acquisition Programs''; March 12, 2019: ``Overview of 
Marine Corps Threat Assessment, Requirements, and Acquisition 
for Aviation and Combat Vehicles''; March 26, 2019: Overview of 
Army and Air Force Intelligence, Surveillance, and 
Reconnaissance Platforms Capabilities and Allocation to Support 
Operations''; October 29, 2019: ``Update on Army Soldier 
Equipment Program''; November 13, 2019: ``F-35 Program Update: 
Sustainment, Production, and Affordability Challenges''; 
November 21, 2019: ``Update on the Air Force's Next Generation 
Air Dominance Family of Systems Concept and Digital Century 
Series Initiative''; December 4, 2019: ``Update on Air Force 
Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Systems''; 
January 14, 2020: ``F-35 Program and Sustainment Update''; 
February 12, 2020: ``Update on Joint Critical/Preferred 
Munitions and Ammunition Inventory''; February 28, 2020: 
``Department of Defense Electronic Warfare Update''; May 29, 
2020: ``F-35 Program Update''; June 9, 2020: ``Army COVID-19 
Update''; September 22, 2020: ``Modernization of the 
Conventional Ammunition Production Industrial Base''; and 
September 25, 2020: ``United States Marine Corps Force 
Design''.
    The subcommittee considered and reported legislation that 
was ultimately included in the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92). The legislation 
covered a range of issues, including authorization of 
appropriations for procurement programs and research, 
development, test, and evaluation programs for the Departments 
of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and the Reserve Components.
    The subcommittee considered and reported legislation that 
was ultimately included in William M. (Mac) Thornberry National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021. The legislation 
covered a range of issues, including authorization of 
appropriations for procurement programs and research, 
development, test, and evaluation programs for the Departments 
of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and the Reserve Components.

                      Future of Defense Task Force

    The Future of Defense Task Force was created on October 16, 
2019, by Chairman Adam Smith and Ranking Member William ``Mac'' 
Thornberry. Its mandate was to review emerging threats and 
technologies and to evaluate the Department of Defense's 
strategic and budgetary priorities to ensure the United States 
remains in long-term strategic overmatch of global competitors.
    The following committee members were assigned to the Task 
Force: Reps. Seth Moulton and Jim Banks, who served as Co-
Chairs; and Reps. Susan Davis, Scott DesJarlais, Chrissy 
Houlahan, Elissa Slotkin, Paul Mitchell, and Michael Waltz.
    The Task Force was established in accordance with the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, applicable to standing 
committees, and the Rules of the Committee on Armed Services. 
Pursuant to Rule 5, subsection (b) of the Committee Rules, the 
Task Force existed for an initial period of 3 months with a 
renewal for an additional 3 months, which the Task Force 
exercised.
    For 6 months, the Task Force conducted briefings, meetings, 
hearings, virtual roundtables, site visits and CODELS within 
the committee's Rule X jurisdiction. The Task Force received 
testimony from executive branch officials, members of the 
military services, and outside experts to include 
representatives from academia, think tanks and private 
industry.
    The Task Force ended on April 15, 2020. An extensive report 
of the Task Force's findings and recommendations was submitted 
to the chairman and ranking member on Sept. 23, 2020, by the 
eight members.
    Details of activities included the following:
    On October 9, 2019, the Future of Defense Task Force 
convened a hearing entitled ``Theories of Victory,'' which 
gamed out the future of defense for the next 30 to 50 years to 
determine what success should look like. Witnesses were Ms. 
Michele Flournoy and Senator Jim Talent.
    On February 5, 2020, the Future of Defense Task Force 
convened a second hearing entitled ``Supercharging the 
Innovation Base,'' which explored ways to ensure private 
industry and the Department of Defense were best prepared to 
meet emerging threats to U.S. national security. Witnesses 
included the Honorable Eric Fanning, Mr. Raj Shah, and Mr. 
Chris Brose.
    A third hearing, ``Battlefield Perspectives,'' was 
scheduled for March 2020, but was postponed then cancelled due 
to COVID-19 restrictions.
    Each Wednesday during session for six months, Task Force 
members received classified briefings on relevant subject 
matter to include artificial intelligence, bio security, 
emerging technologies, and the innovation base, among others. 
Briefers included representatives from the Department of 
Defense, the military services, academia, and private industry, 
among others.
    The Task Force conducted five CODELS during its review:
    The Halifax Security Forum (Halifax, Canada); November 22, 
2019-November 24, 2019.
    Asia (Vietnam, Cambodia and Thailand); January 17, 2020-
January 24, 2020.
    The Munich Security Conference (Munich, Germany); February 
14-February 15, 2020.
    AFRICOM and Africa (Germany, Djibouti, Kenya); February 16-
February 20, 2020.
    Silicon Valley and Boston (Palo Alto, Mountain View, San 
Mateo, Mountain View and San Francisco, California, and Boston, 
Massachusetts); February 17, 2020-February 21, 2020.
    A sixth CODEL to the North Atlantic Treaty Association 
headquarters and to several Arctic states was cancelled due to 
COVID-19 travel restrictions.

                              PUBLICATIONS

                             HOUSE REPORTS

------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Report Number          Date Filed        Bill Number        Title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Rept. 116-120.  June 19, 2019........  H.R. 2500....  National
                                                          Defense
                                                          Authorization
                                                          Act for Fiscal
                                                          Year 2020
H. Rept. 116-120,  June 27, 2019........  H.R. 2500....  National
 Part 2.                                                  Defense
                                                          Authorization
                                                          Act for Fiscal
                                                          Year 2020
H. Rept. 116-442.  July 9, 2020.........  H.R. 6395....  William M.
                                                          (Mac)
                                                          Thornberry
                                                          National
                                                          Defense
                                                          Authorization
                                                          Act for Fiscal
                                                          Year 2021
H. Rept. 116-442,  July 16, 2020........  H.R. 6395....  William M.
 Part 2.                                                  (Mac)
                                                          Thornberry
                                                          National
                                                          Defense
                                                          Authorization
                                                          Act for Fiscal
                                                          Year 2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            COMMITTEE PRINTS

    Committee Print No. 1--Rules of the Committee on Armed 
Services, House of Representatives of the United States, 116th 
Congress, 2019 2020, adopted January 24, 2019.
    Committee Print No. 2--Future of Defense Task Force Report 
2020.

                         PUBLISHED PROCEEDINGS

    H.A.S.C. No. 116-1--Full Committee Organizational Meeting 
for the 116th Congress (01/24/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-2--Full Committee Hearing: Department of 
Defense Support to the Southern Border (01/29/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-3--Full Committee Hearing: Evaluation of 
the Department of Defense's Counterterrorism Approach (02/06/
2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-4--Subcommittee on Military Personnel 
Hearing: Military Service Academies' Action Plans to Address 
the Results of Sexual Assault and Violence Report at the 
Military Service Academies (02/13/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-5--Subcommittee on Readiness and 
Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces Joint Hearing: 
Naval Surface Forces Readiness: Are Navy Reforms Adequate? (02/
26/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-6--Subcommittee on Strategic Forces 
Hearing: INF Withdrawal and the Future of Arms Control: 
Implications for the Security of the United States and its 
Allies (02/26/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-7--Subcommittee on Intelligence and 
Emerging Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Department of 
Defense Information Technology, Cybersecurity, and Information 
Assurance (02/26/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-8--Subcommittee on Military Personnel 
Hearing: Transgender Service in the Military Policy (02/27/
2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-9--Full Committee Hearing: Outside 
Perspectives on Nuclear Deterrence Policy and Posture Update 
(03/06/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-10--Full Committee Hearing: National 
Security Challenges and U.S. Military Activities in the Greater 
Middle East and Africa (03/07/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-11--Subcommittee on Seapower and 
Projection Forces and Subcommittee on Readiness Joint Hearing: 
U.S. Transportation Command and Maritime Administration: State 
of the Mobility Enterprise (03/07/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-12--Subcommittee on Military Personnel 
Hearing: Outside Perspectives on Military Personnel Policy (03/
12/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-13--Full Committee Hearing: National 
Security Challenges and U.S. Military Activities in Europe (03/
13/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-14--Subcommittee on Intelligence and 
Emerging Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Fiscal Year 2020 
Budget Request for U.S. Cyber Command and Operations in 
Cyberspace (03/13/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-15--Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: 
Ensuring Resiliency of Military Installations and Operations in 
Response to Climate Changes (03/13/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-16--Subcommittee on Seapower and 
Projection Forces Hearing: Department of the Air Force Fiscal 
Year 2020 Budget Request for Seapower and Projection Forces 
(03/14/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-17--Full Committee Hearing: The Fiscal 
Year 2020 National Defense Authorization Budget Request from 
the Department of Defense (03/26/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-18--Subcommittee on Seapower and 
Projection Forces Hearing: Department of the Navy Fiscal Year 
2020 Budget Request for Seapower and Projection Forces (03/26/
2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-19--Full Committee Hearing: National 
Security Challenges and U.S. Military Activities in the Indo-
Pacific (03/27/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-20--Subcommittee on Military Personnel 
Hearing: Reserve Component Duty Status Reform (03/27/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-21--Subcommittee on Intelligence and 
Emerging Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Fiscal Year 2020 
Budget Request for Department of Defense Science and Technology 
Programs: Maintaining a Robust Ecosystem for Our Technological 
Edge (03/28/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-22--Subcommittee on Strategic Forces 
Hearing: Fiscal Year 2020 Priorities for Department of Defense 
Nuclear Activities (03/28/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-23--Full Committee Hearing: The Fiscal 
Year 2020 National Defense Authorization Budget Request for the 
Department of Army and the Department of the Air Force (04/02/
2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-24--Subcommittee on Military Personnel 
Hearing: Examining the Role of the Commander in Sexual Assault 
Prosecutions (04/02/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-25--Full Committee Hearing: Member Day 
(04/03/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-26--Subcommittee on Strategic Forces 
Hearing: Fiscal Year 2020 Priorities for National Security 
Space Programs (04/03/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-27--Subcommittee on Intelligence and 
Emerging Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Reviewing Department 
of Defense Strategy, Policy, and Programs for Countering 
Weapons of Mass Destruction for Fiscal Year 2020 (04/03/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-28--Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land 
Forces Hearing: Navy and Marine Corps Tactical Aviation and 
Ground Modernization (04/04/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-29--Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: 
Mismanaged Military Family Housing Programs: What is the 
Recovery Plan? (04/04/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-30--Subcommittee on Intelligence and 
Emerging Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Evolution, 
Transformation, and Sustainment: A Review of the Fiscal Year 
2020 Budget Request for U.S. Special Operations Forces and 
Command (04/09/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-31--Subcommittee on Strategic Forces 
Hearing: Fiscal Year 2020 Priorities for Atomic Energy Defense, 
Nonproliferation, Safety and Environmental Management (04/09/
2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-32--Full Committee Hearing: The Fiscal 
Year 2020 National Defense Authorization Budget Request for the 
Department of Navy (04/10/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-33--Subcommittee on Military Personnel 
Hearing: Feres Doctrine--A Policy in Need of Reform? (04/30/
2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-34--Full Committee Hearing: National 
Security Challenges and U.S. Military Activity in North and 
South America (05/01/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-35--Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land 
Forces Hearing: Fiscal Year 2020 Department of the Army 
Modernization Programs (05/01/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-36--Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: 
Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request for Military Construction, 
Energy, and Environmental Programs (05/01/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-37--Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land 
Forces Hearing: Department of the Air Force Acquisition and 
Modernization Programs in the Fiscal Year 2020 National Defense 
Authorization President's Budget Request (05/02/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-38--Subcommittee on Strategic Forces 
Hearing: Fiscal Year 2020 Priorities for Missile Defense and 
Missile Defeat Programs (05/08/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-39--Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: 
Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request for Military Readiness (05/09/
2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-40--Full Committee Hearing: The Department 
of Defense's Financial Improvement and Audit Remediation Plan: 
The Path Forward (05/16/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-41--Subcommittee on Military Personnel 
Hearing: Military Personnel Management--How Are the Military 
Services Adapting to Recruit, Retain, and Manage High Quality 
Talent to Meet the Needs of a Modern Military? (05/16/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-42--Subcommittee on Military Personnel 
Hearing: Military and Veteran Suicide: Understanding the 
Problem and Preparing for the Future (05/21/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-43--Subcommittee on Intelligence and 
Emerging Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Securing the 
Nation's Internet Architecture (09/10/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-44--Subcommittee on Military Personnel 
Hearing: Shattered Families, Shattered Service: Taking Military 
Domestic Violence Out of the Shadows (09/18/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-45--Subcommittee on Strategic Forces 
Hearing: Status of the B61-2 Life Extension and W88 Alteration-
370 Programs (09/25/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-46--Subcommittee on Intelligence and 
Emerging Threats and Capabilities and Subcommittee on Readiness 
Joint Hearing: Resiliency of Military Installations to Emerging 
Threats (10/16/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-47--Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: 
Ship and Submarine Maintenance: Cost and Schedule Challenges 
(10/22/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-48--Future of Defense Task Force Hearing: 
Theories of Victory (10/29/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-49--Subcommittee on Readiness and 
Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces Joint Hearing: F-
35 Program Update: Sustainment, Production, and Affordability 
Challenges (11/13/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-50--Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: The 
Department of Defense Organic Industrial Base: Challenges, 
Solutions and Readiness Impacts (11/21/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-51--Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: 
Privatized Housing: Are Conditions Improving for Our Military 
Families? (12/05/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-52--Subcommittee on Military Personnel 
Hearing: Military Health System Reform: A Cure for Efficiency 
and Readiness? (12/05/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-53--Subcommittee on Military Personnel 
Hearing: Diversity in Recruiting and Retention: Increasing 
Diversity in the Military--What the Military Services are Doing 
(12/10/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-54--Full Committee Hearing: U.S. Policy in 
Syria and the Broader Region (12/11/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-55--Subcommittee on Intelligence and 
Emerging Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Climate Change in 
the Era of Strategic Competition (12/11/2019).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-56--Full Committee Hearing: DOD's Role in 
Competing with China (01/15/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-57--Full Committee Hearing: Security 
Update on the Korean Peninsula (01/28/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-58--Future of Defense Task Force Hearing: 
Supercharging the innovation base (02/05/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-59--Subcommittee on Military Personnel 
Hearing: Exceptional Family Member Program--Are the Military 
Services Really Taking Care of Family Members? (02/05/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-60--Subcommittee on Seapower and 
Projection Forces and Subcommittee on Readiness Joint Hearing: 
Update on Navy and Marine Corps Readiness in the Pacific in the 
Aftermath of Recent Mishaps (02/05/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-61--Full Committee Hearing: The Department 
of Defense's Role in Long-Term Major State Competition (02/11/
2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-62--Subcommittee on Intelligence and 
Emerging Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Reviewing Department 
of Defense Strategy, Policy, and Programs for Countering 
Weapons of Mass Destruction for Fiscal Year 2021 (02/11/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-63--Subcommittee on Military Personnel 
Hearing: Alarming Incidents of White Supremacy in the 
Military--How to Stop It (02/11/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-64--Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: 
Land Based Ranges: Building Military Readiness While Protecting 
Natural and Cultural Resources (02/12/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-65--Full Committee Hearing: The Fiscal 
Year 2021 National Defense Authorization Budget Request from 
the Department of Defense (02/26/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-66--Full Committee Hearing: The Fiscal 
Year 2021 National Defense Authorization Budget Request for the 
Department of the Navy (02/27/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-67--Subcommittee on Strategic Forces 
Hearing: Strategic Forces Posture Hearing (02/27/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-68--Subcommittee on Seapower and 
Projection Forces Hearing: Air Force Projection Forces Aviation 
Programs and Capabilities Related to the 2021 President's 
Budget Request (02/27/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-69--Full Committee Hearing: The Fiscal 
Year 2021 National Defense Authorization Budget Request for the 
Department of the Army (03/03/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-70--Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: 
Fiscal Year 2021 Air Force and Space Force Readiness Posture 
(03/03/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-71--Subcommittee on Strategic Forces 
Hearing: Fiscal Year 2021 Budget Request for Nuclear Forces and 
Atomic Energy Defense Activities (03/03/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-72--Full Committee Hearing: The Fiscal 
Year 2021 National Defense Authorization Budget Request for the 
Department of the Air Force (03/04/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-73--Subcommittee on Seapower and 
Projection Forces Hearing: Department of the Navy Fiscal Year 
2021 Budget Request for Seapower and Projection Forces (03/04/
2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-74--Subcommittee on Intelligence and 
Emerging Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Fiscal Year 2021 
Budget Request for U.S. Cyber Command and Operations in 
Cyberspace (03/04/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-75--Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land 
Forces Hearing: Fiscal Year 2021 Army and Marine Corps Ground 
Systems Modernization Programs (03/05/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-76--Full Committee Hearing: National 
Security Challenges and U.S. Military Activities in the Greater 
Middle East and Africa (03/10/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-77--Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land 
Forces Hearing: Department of Defense Tactical and Rotary 
Aircraft Acquisition and Modernization Programs in the Fiscal 
Year 2021 President's Budget Request (03/10/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-78--Full Committee Hearing: National 
Security Challenges and U.S. Military Activity in North and 
South America (03/11/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-79--Subcommittee on Intelligence and 
Emerging Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Reviewing Department 
of Defense Science and Technology Strategy, Policy and Programs 
for Fiscal Year 2021: Maintaining a Robust Ecosystem for Our 
Technological Edge (03/11/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-80--Subcommittee on Seapower and 
Projection Forces and Subcommittee on Readiness Joint Hearing: 
Sealift and Mobility Requirements in Support of the National 
Defense Strategy (03/11/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-81--Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: 
Fiscal Year 2021 Navy and Marine Corps Readiness Posture (03/
12/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-82--Subcommittee on Strategic Forces 
Hearing: Fiscal Year 2021 Priorities for Missile Defense and 
Missile Defeat Programs (03/12/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-83--Subcommittee on Seapower and 
Projection Forces Hearing: Future Force Structure Requirements 
for the United States Navy (06/04/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-84--Full Committee Hearing: Department of 
Defense COVID-19 Response to Defense Industrial Base Challenges 
(06/10/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-85--Subcommittee on Military Personnel 
Hearing: Racial Disparity in the Military Justice System--How 
to Fix the Culture (06/16/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-86--Full Committee Hearing: DOD 
Authorities and Roles Related to Civilian Law Enforcement (07/
09/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-87--Subcommittee on Military Personnel 
Hearing: The Military's #MeToo Moment: An Examination of Sexual 
Harassment and Perceived Retaliation in the Department of 
Defense and at Fort Hood (07/29/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-88--Subcommittee on Intelligence and 
Emerging Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Review of the 
Recommendations of the Cyberspace Solarium Commission (07/30/
2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-89--Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: 
Addressing the Legacy of Department of Defense use of PFAS: 
Protecting Our Communities and Implementing Reform (09/15/
2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-90--Subcommittee on Intelligence and 
Emerging Threats and Capabilities Hearing: Interim Review of 
the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence 
Effort and Recommendations (09/17/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-91--Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land 
Forces Hearing: Modernization of the Conventional Ammunition 
Production Industrial Base (09/22/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-92--Full Committee Hearing: The Role of 
Allies and Partners in U.S. Military Strategy and Operations 
(09/23/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-93--Full Committee Hearing: U.S. Defense 
Posture Changes in the European Theater (09/30/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-94--Subcommittee on Intelligence and 
Emerging Threats and Capabilities Hearing and House Committee 
on Foreign Affairs Joint Hearing: Strengthening Biological 
Security: Traditional Threats and Emerging Challenges (10/02/
2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-95--Full Committee Hearing: The U.S. 
military mission in Afghanistan and implications of the peace 
process on U.S. involvement (11/20/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-96--Subcommittee on Readiness Hearing: 
Review of the Findings and Recommendations of the National 
Commission on Military Aviation Safety (12/03/2020).
    H.A.S.C. No. 116-97--Subcommittee on Military Personnel 
Hearing: Fort Hood 2020: The Findings and Recommendations of 
the Fort Hood Independent Review Committee (12/09/2020).

                             PRESS RELEASES


                             First Session

JANUARY 2019
    1/4/19--Smith Statement On Trump Plan To Misuse An 
Emergency Authority & Divert Money From Military Readiness To 
Pay For His Wall
    1/16/19--Smith Welcomes Incoming Members Of The House Armed 
Services Committee
    1/17/19--Smith Statement On Trump Missile Defense Review
    1/18/19--Smith & Langevin Slam Trump Administration's Half-
Baked Climate Change Report
    1/18/19--Smith Decries President Trump's Attack On 
Congressional Oversight Of Military Issues
    1/22/19--Smith Statement On Supreme Court Decision About 
Transgender Military Service
    1/23/19--Smith Congratulates Congressman Anthony Brown On 
Election As Vice Chair Of The Armed Services Committee
    1/23/19--Democratic Subcommittee Members For 116th Congress
    1/23/19--Smith, Thornberry Release HASC Subcommittee Chairs 
And Ranking Members For 116th Congress
    1/24/19--Smith Statement On $94 Billion Increase In The 
Estimated Cost Of Nuclear Weapons Upgrades
    1/30/19--Chairman Smith, Senator Warren Introduce Bill 
Establishing ``No First Use'' Policy For Nuclear Weapons Files
    1/31/19--Smith Letter To Shanahan Regarding Transparency 
With Congress Files
FEBRUARY 2019
    2/1/2019--Smith Appoints Vice Chairs Of Armed Services 
Subcommittees
    2/1/2019--Smith, Cooper Statement On Withdrawal From The 
Inf Treaty
    2/11/2019--Smith Statement On The Passing Of Walter Jones
    2/14/2019--Readiness Subcommittee Holds Military Family 
Housing Roundtable
    2/15/2019--Smith Statement On President Trump's Declaration 
Of A National Emergency In Order To Take Funds Supporting 
Military Families And Military Readiness And Spend Them On His 
Wall
    2/21/2019--Smith, Engel & Schiff To Trump: Stop Withholding 
Information On North Korea From Congress Files
    2/25/2019--Chairman Smith And Chairman Yarmuth Denounce 
Trump Budget's Planned Use Of Defense Budget Gimmick: Acting 
OMB Director Vought Also Announces Trump Budget Will Call For 
Non-Defense Funding Cut
    2/28/2019--Committee Chairs Question Rationale For Proposed 
NSC Climate Change Panel
MARCH 2019
    3/4/2019--Chairman Smith Denounces Trump's Acceptance Of 
Questionable World Leaders
    3/8/2019--Chairman Smith Criticizes Trump's Cancellation Of 
The Requirement To Report Civilian Causalities
    3/12/2019--Chairman Smith Statement On DOD Implementation 
Of The Ban On Transgender Military Service
    3/13/2019--Readiness Subcommittee Holds Hearing On Impacts 
Of Climate Change
    3/18/2019--Chairman Smith Statement On Release Of List Of 
At-Risk Military Construction Projects That Could Be Cut To 
Fund Border Wall
    3/25/2019--Chairman Smith Statement On Space Force Proposal
    3/26/2019--Chairman Smith Statement On DOD Reprogramming To 
Fund Border Wall Files
    3/27/2019--UPDATED HASC SCHEDULE, APRIL 1-5
APRIL 2019
    4/2/2019--HASC Public Schedule, April 8-12
    4/2/2019--Update#3 HASC Schedule, April 1-5
    4/10/2019--Readiness Subcommittee Chairman Garamendi Leads 
Congressional Delegation To Observe Damaged Military 
Installations And Privatized Military Housing Units
    4/10/2019--HASC Chairman Smith And Ranking Member 
Thornberry Announce Markup Schedule For Fiscal Year 2020 
National Defense Authorization Act
    4/12/2019--Readiness Chairman Garamendi Concludes 
Congressional Delegation To Study Military Housing And Military 
Installations Impacted By Hurricane Florence
    4/18/2019--Committee Chair Statement On Redacted Release Of 
The Mueller Investigation Report
    4/23/2019--HASC Schedule, April 29-May 3
    4/29/2019--Updated HASC Schedule, April 29-May 3
    4/30/2019--Chairman Smith And Ranking Member Thornberry 
Statement On The Passing Of Former Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher
    4/30/2019--HASC Schedule, May 6-10
MAY 2019
    5/1/2019--Readiness Subcommittee Holds Hearing on 
Department of Defense's FY20 Budget Request for Military 
Construction, Energy and Environmental Programs
    5/7/2019--HASC SCHEDULE, MAY 13-17
    5/8/2019--Chairman Smith Statement on Iranian Conflict and 
Potential Escalation in the Region
    5/9/2019--Readiness Subcommittee Holds Hearing on FY20 
Budget Request for Military Readiness
    5/14/2019--HASC SCHEDULE, MAY 20-24
    5/15/2019--HASC Democrats Introduce Bill to Limit DOD's 
Authority to Reprogram Military Construction Funds
    5/16/2019--Smith, Schiff, and Engel Demand Briefing and 
Documents on Arms Control, Verification, and Compliance Report
    5/22/2019--Smith and Thornberry Slam New DOD Policy to 
Stonewall Congressional Oversight
    5/22/2019--UPDATED: Markup Schedule for Fiscal Year 2020 
National Defense Authorization Act
    5/24/2019--Smith Concerned About Increased Military 
Presence in the Middle East
    5/27/2019--Smith Statement Honoring Memorial Day
    5/29/2019--Tomorrow: NDAA Markup Logistics Press Briefing
    5/31/2019--Subcommittee Markup Press Background Briefings
JUNE 2019
    6/3/2019--Military Personnel Subcommittee Mark Summary for 
H.R. 2500 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2020
    6/3/2019--Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee Mark 
Summary for H.R. 2500 National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2020
    6/3/2019--Strategic Forces Subcommittee Mark Summary for 
H.R. 2500 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2020
    6/3/2019--Intelligence and Emerging Threats and 
Capabilities Subcommittee Mark Summary for H.R. 2500 National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
    6/3/2019--Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee Mark 
Summary for H.R. 2500 National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2020
    6/4/2019--Readiness Subcommittee Mark Summary for H.R. 2500 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
    6/5/2019--HASC Subcommittee Marks as Reported for H.R. 2500 
The National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2020
    6/5/2019--Full Committee Markup Press Background Briefing
    6/5/2019--Chairman Smith Response to Trump's Lies Regarding 
Transgender Service Members' Medical Treatment
    6/7/2019--HASC Subcommittee Marks as Reported for H.R. 2500 
The National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2020
    6/10/2019--Chairman Smith Releases H.R. 2500 The National 
Defense Authorization Act for FY 2020
    6/12/2019--Chairman Smith Statement on Efforts to Strip Key 
Nuclear Provisions from the FY20 NDAA
    6/13/2019--Chairman Smith Statement on the Importance of 
Passing the FY20 NDAA Without Offsets
    6/18/2019--Smith Increasingly Concerned About Heightened 
Tensions in the Middle East
    6/18/2019--Chairman Smith Statement on Appointment of Mark 
Esper to Acting Secretary of Defense
JULY 2019
    7/9/2019--Smith Refutes False Claims about the FY20 NDAA
    7/12/2019--Democratic Majority Passes Defense Bill Through 
the House
    7/23/2019--Chairman Smith Statement on Confirmation of Mark 
Esper as Secretary of Defense
AUGUST 2019
    8/20/19--Chairman Smith Readout of Call With the Indian 
Ambassador to the U.S.
    8/30/19--Chairman Smith Statement on Trump Administration's 
Harmful Change in USCIS Policy
SEPTEMBER 2019
    9/3/2019--Chairman Smith Statement on Continued Attempts to 
Fund Border Wall at the Pentagon's Expense
    9/3/2019--HASC SCHEDULE, SEPTEMBER 9-13
    9/9/2019--Chairman Smith Statement on the Retirement of 
Congresswoman Susan Davis
    9/10/2019--Rep. Smith and Sen. Menendez Formally Request 
CBO Analyze the Costs of Trump Admin Allowing U.S.-Russia 
Nuclear Treaty to Expire
    9/11/2019--HASC SCHEDULE, SEPTEMBER 16-20
    9/17/2019--HASC SCHEDULE, SEPTEMBER 23-27
    9/18/2019--Defense Bill Goes to Conference and House 
Leadership Announces Conferees
    9/18/2019--NDAA Conferees to Meet
    9/26/2019--Smith Warns Against Ratcheting up Tension in the 
Middle East by Deploying Additional Military Personnel and 
Assets
    9/30/2019--Chairman Smith Statement on the Retirement of 
Ranking Member Thornberry
OCTOBER 2019
    10/7/2019--Smith Slams Shift in U.S. Policy in Syria, Warns 
of Implications
    10/8/2019--Top National Security Democrats Warn Trump Admin 
Against U.S. Withdrawal from Key Euro-Atlantic Security Treaty
    10/9/2019--HASC Schedule, October 14-18
    10/10/2019--Smith Statement Following Visit to Border Wall 
Construction Site
    10/11/2019--Smith Warns Against Aiding Saudi Arabia After 
Abandoning Kurdish Partners
    10/15/2019--HASC Schedule, October 21-25
    10/17/2019--Smith Statement on the Passing of Congressman 
Elijah Cummings
    10/17/2019--Chairmen Smith and Engel Statement on the 
Retirement of Rose Gottemoeller, Deputy Secretary General of 
NATO
    10/18/2019--House Armed Services Committee Stands Up Future 
of Defense Task Force
    10/22/2019--HASC Schedule: October 28-November 1
    10/24/2019--Smith Slams Decision to Abandon the Kurds
    10/24/2019--Smith Blames Border Wall as Main Sticking Point 
in FY20 NDAA Negotiations
    10/27/2019--Smith Statement on Al-Baghdadi Special 
Operation
NOVEMBER 2019
    11/6/2019--HASC Schedule: November 11-15
    11/15/2019--UPDATED HASC Schedule: November 18-22
    11/22/2019--Chairmen Smith and Engel Demand Answers on 
White House Scheme on Open Skies Treaty
    11/25/2019--Chairman Smith Condemns President Trump's 
Interference in the Military Justice Process
    11/27/2019--HASC Schedule: December 2-6
DECEMBER 2019
    12/3/2019--HASC Schedule: December 9-13
    12/3/2019--Chairmen Smith and Engel Demand Answers on 
Administration's Negotiations with Asian Allies
    12/9/2019--House and Senate Armed Services Committees 
Complete Conference for the FY20 National Defense Authorization 
Act
    12/11/2019--Chairman Smith Corrects the Record on the FY20 
NDAA
    12/11/2019--Chairman Smith on the Passage of the FY20 NDAA 
Conference Report
    12/20/2019--Chairman Smith Statement as the FY20 NDAA is 
Signed into Law
    12/29/2019--Smith Slams Recent Rocket Attacks in Iraq 
Killing U.S. Contractor

                             Second Session

JANUARY 2020
    1/3/2020--Smith Raises Grave Concerns About Pentagon 
Military Action in Iraq
    1/8/2020--HASC Schedule: January 13-17
    1/15/2020--Smith Statement on Future Plans to Steal 
Department of Defense Funds to pay for a Border Wall
    1/21/2020--HASC Schedule: January 27-31
    1/28/2020--Smith and Thornberry Joint Statement on U.K.'s 
5G Decision
    1/29/2020--HASC Schedule: February 3-7
FEBRUARY 2020
    2/3/2020--UPDATED HASC Schedule: February 3-7
    2/4/2020--HASC Schedule: February 10-14
    2/4/2020--Smith Criticizes the Administration's Deployment 
of W76 2 Low-Yield Nuclear Warheads
    2/5/2020--UPDATED HASC Schedule: February 10-14
    2/8/2020--Smith Denounces the Removal of Lieutenant Colonel 
Alexander S. Vindman
    2/13/2020--Smith Condemns Waste of DoD Funds on the Border 
Wall
    2/19/2020--HASC Schedule: February 24-28
    2/21/2020--UPDATED HASC Schedule: February 24-28
    2/26/2020--HASC Schedule: March 2-6
    2/27/2020--UPDATED HASC Schedule: March 2-6
    2/28/2020--Smith, Thornberry, Garamendi and Lamborn Urge 
DOD to Expand Tenant Bill of Rights as Required by Law
    2/29/2020--Smith Statement on Conditions-Based Peace 
Agreement in Afghanistan
MARCH 2020
    3/4/2020--HASC Schedule: March 9-13
    3/9/2020--UPDATED HASC Schedule: March 9-13
    3/13/2020--Smith Statement on the PFAS Task Force March 
Progress Report
    3/26/2020--Smith & Engel Lead Effort Pushing Trump 
Administration to Maintain Humanitarian Assistance to Yemen 
During Coronavirus Crisis
    3/27/2020--Smith, Thornberry Introduce ``By Request'' Bill 
and Begin FY21 National Defense Authorization Act Process
    3/30/2020--Smith Statement on Continued COVID Precautions 
and the FY21 NDAA
APRIL 2020
    4/1/2020--House Committee Chairs Request Extension of 
Public Comment Periods During Coronavirus National Emergency
    4/2/2020--HASC Leadership Joint Statement on the Dismissal 
of U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt Captain
    4/6/2020--Smith Calls for Modly's Removal After Mishandling 
U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt COVID-19 Outbreak
    4/7/2020--Smith, Engel, Reed, & Menendez Statement on Open 
Skies Treaty
    4/7/2020--Smith Statement on Resignation of Acting 
Secretary of the Navy Modly
    4/9/2020--Smith, Pallone, & Thompson Urge President Trump 
to Coordinate Production and Acquisition of COVID-19 Response 
Supplies
    4/14/2020--Smith Statement on One-Year Anniversary of 
Trump's Discriminatory Transgender Ban
    4/15/2020--Leading National Security Democrats Raise Alarm 
over Trump Admin's Dispute With South Korea Over Cost-Sharing 
Deal
    4/17/2020--Smith Statement on DOD Inspector General's JEDI 
Findings
    4/17/2020--Smith Slams High-Risk Ligado Request
    4/24/2020--Smith Statement on the Navy's Investigation of 
the COVID-19 Outbreak Aboard the U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt
    4/28/2020--Smith Slams Trump Administration's Continued 
Theft of DoD Funding
    4/28/2020--Smith, Thornberry Statement on FY21 NDAA Process
    4/29/2020--Smith Statement on the Navy's Additional 
Investigation of the COVID-19 Outbreak Aboard the U.S.S. 
Theodore Roosevelt
MAY 2020
    5/8/2020--Smith, Thornberry, and 20 Bipartisan Members 
Demand Answers From FCC
    5/15/2020--Smith, Thornberry Sign Bipartisan, Bicameral 
Letter to Administration in Support of MFO in Egypt's Sinai 
Peninsula
    5/18/2020--Smith Statement on Navy's First Transgender 
Service Waiver
    5/21/2020--Smith, Cooper Statement on Trump 
Administration's Withdrawal From the Open Skies Treaty
    5/22/2020--Smith & Engel Denounce Trump Administration's 
Illegal Withdrawal from Open Skies Treaty
    5/22/2020--Smith and 20 Armed Services Democrats Slam Trump 
Administration's Open Skies Treaty Withdrawal
    5/22/2020--Smith, Speier Call on President Trump to Extend 
National Guard Activation to Combat COVID-19
    5/29/2020--HASC Schedule: June 1-5
JUNE 2020
    6/1/2020--Smith Statement on Trump's Intent to Invoke the 
Insurrection Act
    6/2/2020--Smith Demands Answers on the Apparent 
Militarization of America
    6/3/2020--Smith, Nadler, Grijalva, and Thompson Call for 
Answers on Trump Administrations Use of Force Against Peaceful 
DC Protestors
    6/3/2020--Smith Calls on Secretary of Defense and Chairman 
of the Joint Chiefs to Explain Military Activity in Washington, 
D.C.
    6/4/2020--HASC Schedule: June 8-12
    6/5/2020--Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Thornberry 
Announce Markup Schedule for Fiscal Year 2021 National Defense 
Authorization Act
    6/5/2020--Smith and 30 HASC Democrats Call for 
Accountability from Military Leadership on Behalf of the 
American People
    6/8/2020--Smith, Lowey, Cooper, Kaptur and Visclosky Call 
for Answers on Trump Administration's Proposal to Resume 
Nuclear Testing
    6/10/2020--Smith Demands Responses to Essential Oversight 
Questions
    6/11/2020--HASC Schedule: June 15-19
    6/12/2020--Subcommittee Markup Press Background Briefings
    6/17/2020--HASC to Distribute NDAA Amendments
    6/19/2020--Smith Statement on Navy's Completion of U.S.S. 
Theodore Roosevelt COVID-19 Investigation
    6/21/2020--Intelligence and Emerging Threats and 
Capabilities Subcommittee Mark Summary for H.R. 6395 National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021
    6/21/2020--Strategic Forces Subcommittee Mark Summary for 
H.R. 6395 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2021
    6/22/2020--Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee Mark 
Summary for H.R. 6395 National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2021
    6/22/2020--Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee Mark 
Summary for H.R. 6395 National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2021
    6/22/2020--Readiness Subcommittee Mark Summary for H.R. 
6395 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021
    6/22/2020--Military Personnel Subcommittee Mark Summary for 
H.R. 6395 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2021
    6/24/2020--Full Committee Markup Press Background Briefing
    6/24/2020--HASC Subcommittee Marks as Reported for H.R. 
6395 The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2021
    6/25/2020--Chairman Smith Releases Summary of H.R. 6395 The 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021
    6/27/2020--Chairman Smith Releases H.R. 6395 The National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021
    6/29/2020--Smith Statement on Russia's Reported Bounties on 
American Soldiers
    6/30/2020--HASC Schedule: July 6-10
JULY 2020
    7/6/2020--Smith, Khanna Statement in Support of UN Envoy 
Martin Griffiths Peace Efforts in Yemen
    7/14/2020--Smith, Waters, Engel, Thompson and Pallone Seek 
Information on Trump Administration Failures to Boost 
Production of PPE and Testing As COVID-19 Cases Spike
    7/14/2020--Smith and Thornberry Joint Statement on the 
U.K.'s Decision to Protect Their Telecom Networks From Huawei
    7/17/2020--Smith Statement on DOD's Ban on the Public 
Display of the Confederate Flag
    7/20/2020--Smith, Thompson, Nadler Joint Statement on Trump 
Administration's Action in Portland
    7/20/2020--Annual Defense Bill Comes to the Floor
    7/21/2020--Democratic-Led House Passes Annual Defense Bill 
for the 60th Consecutive Year
    7/22/2020--HASC Schedule: July 27-31
    7/28/2020--Smith Statement on DoD Line Items in the Senate 
Republican's COVID Supplemental Bill
    7/29/2020--Smith Statement on Proposed Troop Reposition and 
Drawdown in Germany
AUGUST 2020
    8/2/2020--Smith Statement on Anthony Tata's Senate 
Confirmation Failure
    8/11/2020--Smith and Reed Statement on Title 32 Authorities 
for State Response to COVID-19
    8/14/2020--Committee Chairs Smith and DeFazio Lead 68 
Members of Congress in Pressing President Trump on National 
Guard and FEMA Cost-Sharing Requirements
    8/15/2020--Smith Statement on Israel and United Arab 
Emirates Agreement
    8/17/2020--Smith and Thornberry Statement on Prospect of a 
Presidential Pardon for Edward Snowden
    8/26/2020--Smith and Menendez Statement on the Immense 
Costs of Allowing the New START Treaty to Expire
    8/26/2020--Armed Services, Oversight, and Intelligence 
Committees Urge DOD IG Review Retaliation Against Lieutenant 
Colonels Alexander and Yevgeny Vindman
SEPTEMBER 2020
    9/5/2020--Chairman Smith Statement on Trump's Lack of 
Respect for the Military
    9/8/2020--Armed Services and Oversight Subcommittees Open 
Investigation Into Recent Service Member Deaths at Fort Hood
    9/8/2020--HASC Schedule: September 14-18
    9/15/2020--Smith Statement on Israel, United Arab Emirates, 
and Bahrain Normalization Agreement
    9/16/2020--HASC Schedule: September 21-25
    9/17/2020--Thornberry Portrait to Hang in HASC Hearing Room
    9/22/2020--Smith Statement on Defense Department Misuse of 
CARES Act COVID Relief Funds
    9/24/2020--TOMORROW: Future of Defense Task Force Unveils 
Final Report at the Brookings Institution
    9/24/2020--HASC Schedule: September 28-October 2
    9/29/2020--Future of Defense Task Force Releases Final 
Report
OCTOBER 2020
    10/6/2020--Smith Statement on the Military Leadership 
Quarantine for COVID
    10/9/2020--Top National Security Democrats to Esper: Commit 
to Current U.S. Troop Levels on Korean Peninsula
    10/23/2020--Smith Condemns Executive Order Establishing 
Schedule F Appointments
NOVEMBER 2020
    11/9/2020--Smith Condemns Dismissal of Secretary of Defense 
Esper Ahead of Presidential Transition
    11/10/2020--Smith Warns Gutting Pentagon During Transition 
Could be Devastating for National Security
    11/12/2020--HASC Schedule: November 16-20
    11/17/2020--Smith Statement on Afghanistan Troop Drawdown
    11/18/2020--Armed Services Committees Advance Fiscal Year 
2021 Conference Process at Annual `Pass the Gavel' Meeting
    11/18/2020--House Leadership Announces FY21 NDAA Conferees
    11/23/2020--Smith Statement on Withdrawal from Open Skies 
Treaty
    11/24/2020--Smith Statement on the Air Force's Seemingly 
Political C 130J Basing Decision
    11/25/2020--House Chairs Seek Accounting of Political 
Appointees Burrowing into Career Positions at Dozens of 
Agencies
    11/25/2020--HASC Schedule: November 30-December 4
DECEMBER 2020
    12/2/2020--HASC Schedule: December 7-11
    12/2/2020--Smith and Thornberry Statement on FY21 NDAA
    12/3/2020--Smith Statement on Findings and Recommendations 
from the National Commission on Military Aviation Safety
    12/3/2020--Smith Commends Rep. Rogers on Selection as 
Ranking Member
    12/3/2020--Readiness Chairman Garamendi and Ranking Member 
Lamborn Issue Statement on Briefing to Address Concerning Rise 
in Military Aviation Accidents
    12/8/20--Smith Statement on the Passage of the FY21 NDAA 
Conference Report
    12/8/20--Smith Statement on Secretary of Defense Nomination
    12/18/20--Smith and Langevin Statement on Armed Services 
Committee's Commitment to Cybersecurity
    12/19/20--Smith Warns Pentagon Leadership Against Severing 
Dual-Hat Relationship Between the National Security Agency and 
U.S. Cyber Command
    12/21/20--Smith, Maloney and Labor Leaders Urge President 
Trump to Sign FY21 National Defense Authorization Act into Law

                                  [all]