U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

i 

28–996 2018

[H.A.S.C. No. 115–73] 

HEARING 

ON

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019 

AND

OVERSIGHT OF PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED 

PROGRAMS 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGING THREATS AND 

CAPABILITIES HEARING 

ON

EVOLUTION, TRANSFORMATION, AND 

SUSTAINMENT: A REVIEW AND 

ASSESSMENT OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2019 

BUDGET REQUEST FOR U.S. SPECIAL 

OPERATIONS FORCES AND COMMAND 

HEARING HELD 

FEBRUARY 15, 2018 
(II) 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGING THREATS AND CAPABILITIES 

ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York, Chairwoman 

BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania 

BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio 

RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana 

LIZ CHENEY, Wyoming, Vice Chair 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

FRANK A. LOBIONDO, New Jersey 

DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado 

AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia 

JODY B. HICE, Georgia 

JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island 

RICK LARSEN, Washington 

JIM COOPER, Tennessee 

JACKIE SPEIER, California 

MARC A. VEASEY, Texas 

TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii 

BETO O’ROURKE, Texas 

STEPHANIE N. MURPHY, Florida 

PETE VILLANO, Professional Staff Member 

LINDSAY KAVANAUGH, Professional Staff Member 

NEVE SCHADLER, Clerk 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS 

Langevin, Hon. James R., a Representative from Rhode Island, Ranking 

Member, Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities ..................... 2 

Stefanik, Hon. Elise M., a Representative from New York, Chairwoman, 

Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities ..................................... 1 

WITNESSES 

Thomas, GEN Raymond A., USA, Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command ..................................................................................................................... 6 

West, Owen, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations/Low-Intensity Conflict, U.S. Department of Defense ......................................................... 4 

APPENDIX 

PREPARED STATEMENTS: 

Stefanik, Hon. Elise M. .................................................................................... 25 

Thomas, GEN Raymond A. .............................................................................. 39 

West, Owen ....................................................................................................... 27 

DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD: 

[There were no Documents submitted.] 

WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING THE HEARING: 

Mr. Hice ............................................................................................................. 65 

Ms. Stefanik ...................................................................................................... 65 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING: 

Mr. Lamborn ..................................................................................................... 71 

Ms. Speier ......................................................................................................... 69 

Mr. Wilson ......................................................................................................... 70 

(1) 

EVOLUTION, TRANSFORMATION, AND SUSTAINMENT: 

A REVIEW AND ASSESSMENT OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2019 

BUDGET REQUEST FOR U.S. SPECIAL OPERATIONS 

FORCES AND COMMAND 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGING THREATS AND CAPABILITIES, Washington, DC, Thursday, February 15, 2018. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:03 p.m., in room 

2212, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Elise M. Stefanik 

(chairwoman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

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

Ms. STEFANIK. The subcommittee will come to order. I am 

pleased to welcome everyone to this important hearing entitled, 

‘‘Evolution, Transformation, and Sustainment: A Review of the Fiscal Year 2019 Budget Request for U.S. Special Operations Forces 

and Command.’’ The fiscal year 2019 budget request for U.S. Special Operations Command [SOCOM] totals more than $13.6 billion, 

an approximate 10 percent increase, and the largest request ever 

submitted. It also seeks additional personnel authorizations, putting the total size of the force above 71,000, the largest ever envisioned. While I am pleased to see continued fiscal support for special operations forces [SOF], it is deeply troubling to see continued 

dependency on overseas continued [contingency] operations funding 

[OCO]. This problem is most acute in the operations and maintenance accounts, where OCO is an alarming 33 percent. 

One year ago, before this very committee, General Thomas wisely 

noted that such dependency has created a force that is, quote, 

‘‘largely a facade,’’ unquote. Unfortunately, we find ourselves in the 

same place today, if not worse. Working together, we must commit 

to remedy this imbalance. And I look forward to talking about concrete ways in which this committee can help, while you continue 

to help yourselves. This 10 percent budget increase also reminds us 

that we must work to ensure we are not choosing quantity over 

quality, and that special operations forces remain balanced across 

the entirety of the joint operating force and the military services, 

who are, themselves, experiencing near existential readiness crises. 

The recently released National Defense Strategy [NDS] indeed 

places special operations forces central to efforts across the full 

spectrum of non-state and state threats. Rising and asymmetric 

challenges posed by Russia and China and the potential for contingencies on the Korean Peninsula impair our ongoing efforts in Af-
2 

ghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Somalia. All this while SOF 

also maintains a presence in some 80 additional countries today. 

Now, more than ever, we run the risk of overextending our SOF 

forces, who are central to our national defense. 

Of particular concern, we see the fight in Syria changing. More 

and more, our forces are engaging Russian and Syrian regime proxies, as most recently seen in the aggressive fighting in Deir al-Zour. 

The defeat of ISIS [Islamic State of Iraq and Syria] now reveals the 

fingerprints of the larger geopolitical fight we are engaged in, putting at risk current authorities, frameworks, and partnerships, and 

not to mention the considerable risk to our forces on the ground in 

an already clouded and fractured battlefield. 

I look forward to hearing from both of our witnesses today how 

our special operations forces are postured to support the new National Defense Strategy, while also continuing forward as the main 

line of effort in our current efforts across the globe. 

A large part of this subcommittee charge is looking far ahead to 

consider what’s next. In doing so, I see many challenges, but also 

great opportunities in emerging technologies such as AI [artificial 

intelligence], quantum computing, nanotechnology, synthetic biology, the Internet of Things, and many others that will provide a 

significant battlefield advantage for special operations forces and 

the broader joint force. We must ensure that we are doing everything we can to push the technological edge and maintain a battlefield advantage. Rest assured, our near-peer adversaries are already aggressively exploring these technologies, which present both 

economic and national security challenges for our Nation. To this 

end, I am somewhat disappointed that SOCOM’s budget request 

decreases research and development [R&D] funding for a second 

year in a row. I look forward to hearing the rationale for this, and 

taking any necessary steps to ensure we do not lose our technological and battlefield advantages. 

Needless to say, there is a lot of ground to cover today. I would 

like to welcome both of our witnesses, Mr. Owen West, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity 

Conflict [SO/LIC], and General Tony Thomas, Commander of U.S. 

Special Operations Command. Since this is Mr. West’s first appearance before the House Armed Services Committee, let me congratulate you on your confirmation as Assistant Secretary of Defense for 

Special Operations, and we look forward to working with you. I 

would also like now to recognize my friend and the ranking member, Jim Langevin, from Rhode Island, for any opening comments 

he would like to make. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Stefanik can be found in the Appendix on page 25.] 

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

Mr. LANGEVIN. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you, Secretary West. I want to welcome you before the committee. And 

General Thomas, I want to thank you both for appearing before us 

today and for your service to our Nation. It is great to have you 

back, General. Last year in my opening statement on the U.S. Spe-
3 

cial Operations Command budget request, I highlighted the everincreasing demand for reliance on special operations forces by combatant commanders, as the chair has also referenced in her opening statement. Today, that demand and reliance has not decreased. 

In fact, under the new National Defense Strategy it will likely increase with the focus on inter-state competition with gray zone conflicts below the level of armed conflict. Our special operators have 

a myriad of critical skill sets that can be employed across the full 

spectrum of conflict, yet we must be prudent about how the force 

is employed, or we risk breaking the tip of the spear. After 17 

years, the global counterterrorism fight is by no means over. At the 

same time, we must be prepared for future activities and conflicts 

in which potential adversaries have made gains in technologies like 

robotics and biotechnology, and have new capabilities aimed at 

achieving information dominance. The fiscal year 2019 budget request for USSOCOM is $13.6 billion, just 2 percent of the overall Department of Defense [DOD] request. Reflected in the request are more robust investments for enhancing SOF operations throughout the information environment, 

including enhanced cyber and network resiliency capabilities. As a 

result of section 1637 of the National Defense Authorization Act 

[NDAA] for FY [fiscal year] 2018, the Secretary of Defense has directed USSOCOM to establish a centralized capability for military 

information support operations, global messaging, and countermessaging. The FY 2019 request includes $18 million to that end. 

This hearing provides us with an opportunity to understand how 

USSOCOM will fulfill its roles and responsibilities under section 

1637 to better enable an enhanced approach to maximize effects 

from the tactical to strategic levels, while contributing to a wholeof-government effort. As in years past, much of the USSOCOM 

funding request, particularly in the operations and maintenance 

accounts, remains part of the overseas contingency operations. 

However, many of these activities and programs are enduring, 

which means their classification remains a serious concern for me. 

Baseline funding is crucial to provide USSOCOM stability for programming and, reflected properly, it would enable us to better 

understand defense spending in the current and the out-years. 

In addition to a dialogue about the demands on our force, readiness for current and future contingencies, and associated resource 

requests, there are several legislative and policy issues at hand to 

discuss. This includes implementation of section 922 of the NDAA 

regarding the role and responsibilities of your office, Secretary 

West. And I look forward to hearing your vision and efforts for implementing reforms intended to empower your position to effectively conduct internal oversight and advocacy. 

SOF are engaged in operational activities globally under legislative authorities carefully overseen by the committee. Section 1209 

of the FY 2015 NDAA authorizes the Department to provide assistance to vetted Syrian opposition forces. SOF continue to advise and 

assist in the fight against ISIL [Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant] in Syria, where we have seen remarkable progress. A transition to stability operations has begun in many areas. So with 1209 

set to expire on December 31, 2018, I would like to ask our witnesses their perspective on an extension of that authority, and how 
4 

would continued training and assistance be scoped if, in fact, an extension is granted? In closing, I, again, want to thank our witnesses for being here today, and express my gratitude to the men 

and women of our Armed Forces around the globe. I know you have 

extraordinary responsibilities and burdens on your shoulders. The 

Nation is grateful for the work that you do and for your service. 

With that, Madam Chair, I yield back. 

Ms. STEFANIK. Thank you, Jim. And I want to take this moment 

to remind our members that immediately following the open hearing, the committee will reconvene right next door in 2216 for a 

closed, classified roundtable discussion with both of our witnesses. 

Before we begin, I also want to remind our witnesses that your full 

written statements will be submitted for the record. And we ask 

that you summarize those statements in 5 minutes or less for your 

opening statements. Secretary West, we will begin with you, and 

I look forward to your opening statement. 

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

Secretary WEST. Thank you, Chairwoman. Chairwoman, Ranking 

Member, and distinguished members of this committee, I am honored to appear before you as the Assistant Secretary of Defense of 

Special Operations/Low-Intensity Conflict. In my short time on the 

job, I have been most impressed by the level of commitment demonstrated by my staff and their U.S. Special Operations Command 

teammates. There exists a relentless but thoughtful focus on warfighting, which is unsurprising in an enterprise led by Secretary 

Mattis. I am pleased to share this opportunity with one such warfighter. From 2001 to 2013, General Tony Thomas deployed every 

year to combat. He is a reflection of the force he leads, from his 

deployment cycle to the intellectual creativity and competitive 

drive he shares with his fellow operators. 

I mentioned competitiveness because we have a new National 

Defense Strategy that clarifies my priorities, none bigger than 

helping General Thomas steadily build competitive advantage 

across the vast spectrum of warfare special operations calls home. 

The NDS calls for a new era, where we compete in what Secretary 

Mattis calls the contact layer, the daily clash of national will that 

occurs short of armed conflict, where your special operations forces 

are today building relationships and reducing the enemy. The task 

is to remain unpredictable but expansive, pushing the competitive 

boundaries in ways our enemies do not expect. To sustain this expansion, we must be fiscally hawkish, reducing asymmetry by 

adopting a focus on return on investment. 

Overhead costs increase as you move from tooth to tail. In business, we call this upstream inflation. For example, $500,000 in 

Washington, DC, can buy you a think-tank report, whereas 

$500,000 deployed in the field with a captain as a chief investment 

officer can be leveraged into a force of highly trained indigenous allies. 

Secretary Mattis’ business reform efforts seek to make the force 

more lethal, and resource allocation that prioritizes the operating 

forces is the next logical step. The 127 Echo program is an example 
5 

of best practices investing. I would like to thank Congress for continuing to support 127e, which has grown from a pilot program to 

a $100 million lever that has had a direct impact in steadily 

clawing back territory lost to ISIS to name a single impact point. 

Likewise, section 1202 is an example of Congress’ forward-leaning investment to counter unconventional threats. I see these authorities as part of Congress’ strong and continued investment in 

SOF. My commitment to you is to focus on returns. USSOCOM 

amounts to roughly 1.9 percent of the DOD budget, which enables 

a global presence in 90 countries. This capital expenditure fuels the 

current fight, but it must also result in long-term competitive advantage. 

The most important capital investment is human. Everyone on 

this committee is well aware of the demand inelasticity for SOF. 

We simply lack the supply to satisfy all customers. General Thomas has already taken the first step in sustainment by addressing 

dwell time, and a second step by conducting a comprehensive prioritization review. That leaves mission set. 

As Secretary Mattis indicated in late December, our conventional 

force is capable right now of assuming some of these missions. I 

say that leaves mission set because our other option is growing the 

force. Our 2019 budget request does include modest end strength 

increases for SOF across each of the services, but the growth rate 

has slowed precipitously. SOF cannot be quickly grown. Today, we 

face a natural resource that is fully tapped by traditional service 

recruiting. Only 30 percent of high schoolers are qualified for military service. We must, therefore, explore unconventional techniques and new pools to recruit men and women who have the 

right stuff. 

Today’s battlefield has challenged the traditional definition of a 

combatant. Successfully operating in the global contact layer demands that we build a diverse force. The SOF entry standards are 

high, but America has always encouraged its pioneers. We need 

more candidates without military histories, we need more cultural 

diversity, we need more women. 

SOF tryouts are life-altering experiences. The reward is joining 

an elite team, where the commitment to each other is as strong as 

the commitment to country. That human element is the key element in SOCOM. General Thomas runs a global risk-reward venture, and human failure is inevitable. When mistakes are made, 

one of my principal responsibilities is to ensure transparency and 

provide you the necessary and appropriate information. We owe it 

to the families, the Department [of Defense], Congress, and the 

American people to complete investigations with thoroughness, diligence, and timeliness. 

We will take all steps necessary to protect our greatest asset, 

those men and women who have volunteered several times over to 

earn the title of special operators. Their fervent defense of our beloved Nation makes us all proud. I will never lose sight of that. 

I want to end on section 922. I view Congress as a natural partner. During my confirmation hearing, I promised to remain close 

to Congress because of that natural partnership. There should be 

no surprises. The Department is reviewing the implementation of 

922. General Thomas and I are partners in this effort. We will 
6 

move together to implement it. Our goal is to make SOCOM a more 

efficient enterprise that supports the National Defense Strategy 

and the Secretary of Defense. Thank you, and I look forward to 

your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Secretary West can be found in the 

Appendix on page 27.] 

Ms. STEFANIK. Thank you, Secretary West. General Thomas. 

STATEMENT OF GEN RAYMOND A. THOMAS, USA, 

COMMANDER, U.S. SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND 

General THOMAS. Chairwoman Stefanik, Representative Langevin, and distinguished members of the committee, I am honored to 

appear before you to provide an update on the posture of United 

States Special Operations Command and our superb special operations forces. I am pleased to share the table with our new Assistant Secretary for Special Operations, Owen West. Working closely 

with Secretary West, we are embracing section 922 as the natural 

evolution of SOCOM’s service-like responsibilities that Congress 

envisioned when you created us 31 years ago. 

Let me summarize the posture of SOCOM and your special operations forces. We continue to have outsized effects around the 

globe, defeating our enemies, training, equipping, and enabling our 

friends and allies, rapidly transforming the organization to be prepared for all future threats, and caring for our fallen, wounded, 

and ill, and their families. Your special operations forces are doing 

phenomenal work. Since I last appeared before this committee, 

SOCOM’s primary focus has continued to be on the defeat of ISIS 

and al-Qaida and their affiliates. Special operations forces played 

an integral role as part of the joint force in the destruction of ISIS’s 

physical caliphate in Syria and Iraq. 

In coordination with allied and host nation partners, special operations forces continue to confront ISIS and al-Qaida wherever 

they sought sanctuary: in Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya, Somalia, the 

trans-Sahel, Lake Chad basin, the Maghreb, and even as far off as 

the Philippines. In addition to our historic efforts to confront violent extremism, SOCOM continues to enhance our role as part of 

the joint force in assuring allies and improving their capabilities in 

the face of aggressive regional hegemons, reinforcing host nation 

and law enforcement efforts in the Western Hemisphere in defense 

of our national boundaries, and preparing for contingency operations. 

Our successes are directly attributable to recruiting and training 

amazing Americans, outfitting them with the best equipment and 

training in the world, and empowering them with the requisite authorities to defeat our adversaries. Our people continue to be the 

decisive advantage. Congress’ support continues to be key in our efforts in the form of necessary resources and specific authorities. 

With title 10, section 127 Echo, Congress allowed special operations forces to support vetted foreign forces against terrorist 

groups. It is a powerful authority directly responsible for neutralizing hundreds of enemy leaders and fighters. 

Section 1209 of the 2015 NDAA allowed special operations forces 

to train and equip a 50,000-plus person force of vetted, Kurdish, 

and Arab Syrians to remove ISIS from 98 percent of the territory 
7 

they once held in Syria. 1209 played a decisive role in the military 

defeat of ISIS’s physical caliphate. 

In this year’s NDAA, you provided us section 1202, an authority 

special operations forces will employ to support friends and dissuade aggression by strategic competitors. We think it will provide 

us a distinct operational advantage, and thank you for this important irregular warfare authority. Congress has continued to provide 

us with all the resourcing we need to do our job. As you two mentioned in your preamble and Secretary West mentioned in his, in 

fiscal year 2017, our budget was $11.8 billion. Our projected budget 

for fiscal year 2018 is $12.3 billion; and fiscal year 2019 is projected to be $13.6 billion. At 1.9 percent of the total DOD budget, 

with roughly matching sister service contributions, special operations forces provide unique and highly effective capabilities and 

extraordinary return on investment across the full spectrum of conflict. 

Defeating our enemies, defending the homeland, deterring adversaries, supporting allies, and fostering innovation, SOCOM operates at a fast, but manageable pace. 

Since I last appeared, SOCOM service components effectively reduced the deployment tempo of our personnel, with the majority 

under the Secretary of Defense-directed deployment-to-dwell ratio 

of 1:2. Our people and our formations are better than they have 

ever been, thriving under pressure, executing the toughest missions, and achieving success. 

Success, however, has carried a high price. In the past 10 

months, we suffered the loss of 20 special operations personnel 

from our formation in combat, with 144 wounded and injured. I 

will close recounting the words of one of our Gold Star mothers at 

the funeral of her son, Green Beret Staff Sergeant Aaron Rhett 

Butler from the 19th Special Forces Group, a National Guard noncommissioned officer killed in Afghanistan this past August. Aaron 

was a four-time Utah State wrestling champion in high school, and 

the seventh of eight children. In the midst of her grief, Mrs. Butler 

looked me straight in the eye and said, ‘‘Stay on this. Finish it.’’ 

Her resolve resonated with me, and reflects the extraordinary support we enjoy from our service member families. I know it resonates with this committee as well. 

SOCOM and our special operations forces are relentlessly focused 

on winning our current fights and preparing for all future threats 

facing our Nation. Again, thank you for your trust and support for 

this command and our special operations forces. 

[The prepared statement of General Thomas can be found in the 

Appendix on page 39.] 

Ms. STEFANIK. Thank you, General Thomas. My first question, I 

want to relate it back to my opening statement. This subcommittee 

is charged with looking 5, 10, 20 years ahead. And I am concerned 

that we must have a sustainable CT [counterterrorism] and countering violent extremism strategy. We have made significant tactical gains, such as recent advances in Syria, Libya, and even Somalia, but only, in some cases, to see those hard-earned gains 

rolled back because we lack a larger strategy and diplomatic approach that could realize the tactical gains. How do you think we 
8 

ensure that we have a strategy to build in the long term upon tactical successes? And that question is for both of you. 

Secretary WEST. Why don’t I talk about the strategic aspects, 

and Tony, you can talk operations. Chairwoman, I think you have 

teased out the basic question that resides in the NDS, and that is 

as we shift focus, how do we sustain other efforts, especially if we 

have to become more austere in certain buckets, while maintaining, 

in my judgment, what is a best-in-class, competitive advantage 

that General Thomas’ team has built in counterterror? 

When I look across the military missions, I am not sure if there 

is a bigger gap. Coming from the private sector, I think what is 

needed is a resource allocation model. That is underway at the Department. Secretary Mattis has begun to task people to look at an 

investment philosophy. Some of the things that have worked, for 

instance, have been partner forces. So some basic questions would 

be: What are the chances of success? The size of the spend? Can 

we turn it over to GP [General Purpose]? And then to your much 

larger question, how do we build an overall thesis to get us to 

where we want to be ahead 5 or 10 years from now? 

Ms. STEFANIK. General Thomas. 

General THOMAS. Chairwoman, I think I would speak comfortably for the Secretary when he would agree with your analysis that 

tactics without strategy, to quote Sun Tzu, is the noise before defeat. I think you emphasize, and I believe, again, the Secretary and 

I would both reinforce your point, that concomitant diplomatic efforts, with our operational endeavors, are critical to finishing any 

one of these fights. And I would specifically point right now to both 

Afghanistan, where we are surging assets to enable the discussions 

for reconciliation, which must happen to have final and sustainable 

security there. Obviously needs a very fervent diplomatic effort. 

And in Syria right now, you mentioned earlier we are in a phase 

in the moment of the physical defeat of the caliphate, that we are 

endeavoring to provide stability to those ungoverned spaces and to 

those people where we have conducted operations. And that is a 

critical role that has to come through in conjunction with our military operations. 

Ms. STEFANIK. My next question also relates to my opening statement. General Thomas, what can this committee do to reduce your 

dependency on OCO [overseas contingency operations]? 

General THOMAS. Chairwoman, luckily, the current funding bill 

as it stands makes the OCO point moot for these next 2 years, as 

I understand it. It is only a respite, though. And so I am glad that 

you are emphasizing that, that currently, if we were to highlight 

the current dependency on OCO, it is one third of our budget, you 

know, a huge dependency, and I am hopeful in the out-years, that 

we are able to recognize that these are lasting capabilities in 

SOCOM, and your SOCOM that you all want to maintain, and, 

therefore, drive it from OCO into base [budget]. So I am hoping for 

that consideration in the out-years. Luckily again, I think the current budget addresses that. 

Ms. STEFANIK. Secretary West, did you want to add, given your 

oversight role? 

Secretary WEST. Chairwoman, I would just say coming in again 

from the private sector, I think OCO, it seems to me, I am not an 
9 

expert, but it has the potential to build some very bad habits in 

terms of planning. I need to dig into it more. I would be happy to 

get back to you with an assessment. I think it will take me about 

3 months. But the potential is there to really hem what you talked 

about, which is beginning to transform the force out 5 or 10 years. 

[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix on 

page 65.] 

Ms. STEFANIK. And then my last question for the first round is 

we have seen the recent incident of overseas fitness trackers that 

telegraphed the positions and data of our service men and women. 

And that reminds us, of course, of the Internet of Things continues 

to change the game. Can you talk about how this is impacting your 

approach to force protection? What did we learn from the most recent incident, and what changes have been made? And in a broader 

sense, how concerned are you, in general, about the proliferation of 

more than 50 billion interconnected sensors and devices? General 

Thomas. 

General THOMAS. Chairwoman, I think we all had that ‘‘duh’’ 

kind of epiphany moment that the vulnerability that available 

databases like that can present to the force. So clearly, it was an 

immediate vulnerability that the Department was aware of, and 

that we are scrambling to make sure we have the right sort of policy in place. I think it also highlights the other aspect, though, the 

ability to manipulate and leverage data that we are also interested 

in becoming much better in the future. 

So this was an eye-opening exposure, and a vulnerability to the 

Department for a new and developmental technology. But we are 

endeavoring to, one, protect what we need to in terms of available 

data, but also be able to leverage it operationally as well. 

Ms. STEFANIK. I now recognize Mr. Langevin. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. Thank you, Madam Chair. Again, thanks to both 

of our witnesses for your testimony. General Thomas, as I mentioned in my opening statement, there continues to be a high demand for reliance on—increasing reliance on special operations 

forces by combatant commanders. And I believe, as I know you do 

as well, they have to be prudent in employment of the force to 

maintain readiness for current and future missions, as well as preserve strategic operations for our Nation. 

So I know that this issue has also been on the forefront of your 

mind, as we have discussed in our one-on-one meetings. And you 

have been vocal that SOF cannot be the solution to every problem. 

So can you please describe your efforts to ensure the force is employed to meet combatant commander requirements, while also addressing what I would call overreliance on SOF? 

And some concrete examples for the committee to demonstrate 

how you’ve pushed back in cases where it wouldn’t be appropriate 

for SOF, and regular forces could take over the mission would be 

helpful. In addition to resource requirements, how can Congress be 

helpful on this front as well? 

General THOMAS. Congressman, thanks for the question, and 

thanks for the time yesterday to catch up with you. As you implied, 

and certainly as we have looked back over the years, SOF has arguably been applied very liberally, with a dearth of strategy and 

with a dearth of a real vision towards end state. So while we are 
10 

out in many locations, the reality is it is hard to measure. You 

know, what does the end state, what does sustainable security look 

like? There is significant oversight from the Department, specifically from my boss, and certainly with the Assistant Secretary, to 

ensure that we are prioritized in terms of our placement and our 

operations now and into the future. And I would tell you that the 

strategic context is coming together more coherently every day 

under the leadership of Secretary Mattis. 

So I am somewhat confident that we are getting that external 

pressure while we prioritize internally to the limited assets we 

have. If you were to ask me are we able to satisfy all the geographic combatant commanders’ requirements, I would tell you no, 

we routinely tell geographic combatant commanders that we have 

no more to hand out at this time. 

In priority, we have given them out to the respective six geographic combatant commanders. And it forces consideration for 

other forces, whether they are international partners, conventional 

forces, or other capabilities that should be brought to bear. So it 

is a good, vibrant, professional discussion that, I think, is getting 

more in balance all the time. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. Thank you. So the Army’s first security force assistance brigade is going to deploy to Afghanistan this spring. Can 

you tell us how will that deployment to Afghanistan alleviate some 

of the burden on SOF? And what is your understanding of how future security force assistance brigade deployments will contribute 

to alleviating some of the burden on SOF? 

General THOMAS. Yes, Congressman. Specifically, the security 

force assistance brigades [SFAB] that the Army has stood up in 

very rapid order—I give them a lot of credit for creating capability 

in little to no time—are specifically focused on the conventional Afghan kandaks, their conventional units in the field, which, right 

now, are not partnered, unlike our Afghan special operations force 

partners, who do have U.S. special forces and other allied forces 

aligned with them, and have been historically with them. So their 

specific purpose is for the conventional side. However, we are deriving some benefit from the creation of the SFAB as well. 

In fact, I talked to our commander on the ground as recently as 

2 days ago. We specifically will get a few of these teams that will 

thicken our formation at the training base as well as accompany 

some of our new partnered force, some of the mobile forces to allow 

us to be more effective in the field. We are anxious for them to get 

to Afghanistan, and looking forward to the benefit they will provide 

to us. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. I am sure. I hope that achieves the goal we intend. So as a result of section 1637 of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2018, the Secretary of Defense has directed 

USSOCOM to establish a centralized capability for military information support operations, global messaging, and counter-messaging. The FY 2019 request includes $18 million to that end. So 

touch on this. How will USSOCOM fulfill its roles and responsibilities in this capacity to better understand, enable, and enhance the 

Department of Defense approach for maximum effects from the tactical to the strategic? 
11 

And General Thomas, how will USSOCOM contribute to a wholeof-government effort in this space? And what agencies will you coordinate with? And lastly, Secretary West, have you received any 

guidance or participated in efforts related to section 1637 of the FY 

2018 NDAA that provides for the integration of strategic information operations and cyber-enabled information operations? 

General THOMAS. Congressman, very quickly, and I will turn to 

the Assistant Secretary, the timing on this initiative from Congress 

couldn’t be any better. Internally to SOCOM, we were already endeavoring to try and establish better capability at the headquarters 

level, in addition to our proponent—we are the proponent for military information support operations. So we produce and provided 

the field great capability in that regard. But we really did not have 

the requisite operational and potentially national level capabilities. 

So we are intent on providing that. I would offer to you form follows function. And so right now, we are in discussions with the Department in terms of what functions they endeavor, or they see us 

fulfilling. Our form, our structure will follow from that. But again, 

we are appreciative of the resourcing that is involved. 

We are already very, very well integrated with the Global Engagement Center. So you talked about other partners, that is the 

lead for the country and the State Department. We are well integrated with them, and we are hoping to enhance that relationship 

with them going forward, among other agencies. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. Thank you. 

Secretary WEST. Sir, the SO/LIC office is tasked with helping to 

designate a senior DOD official. We are in the process of making 

recommendations right now to the Secretary. I would say from the 

strategic level, you asked what other agencies are involved. What 

is very important is that we get the message right, that it is a culturally attuned message so that no matter what we may gin up in 

the United States DOD, I think we need some country expertise. 

And then looking broadly at the formula of these types of operations, we need a partner force that begins to translate this with 

whom we have the same political end goals. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. Thank you both. I yield back. 

Ms. STEFANIK. Mr. Wilson. 

Mr. WILSON. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I would like to 

thank both members of the panel for being here. It is really reassuring on behalf of American families, your capabilities and competence, and in particular, to know that you are facing challenges 

from North Africa to the Philippines. And it is just encouraging to 

see your dedication and service. And General Thomas, a top priority is supporting the counterpropaganda mission and ensuring 

that the appropriate infrastructure is in place to guarantee success. 

In the FY 2017 NDAA, Congress expanded the mission of the 

Global Engagement Center [GEC] to include counter-state propaganda and disinformation efforts. What is the level of the collaboration between SOCOM and the Global Engagement Center? Do you 

believe there are sufficient opportunities for the cooperation and 

exchange of best practices? Is there anything Congress can do to 

further support this mission? 

General THOMAS. Thanks, Congressman, and thanks for the time 

to link up with you earlier. As I mentioned earlier, and kind of to 
12 

reinforce the point that we all know that relationships matter, we 

have had and enjoyed a very good preexisting relationship with the 

Global Engagement Center, primarily with a counterterrorism 

focus. As their charter has expanded, we are intent on being integrated with all their additional efforts and additional focus going 

forward. The Assistant Secretary talked about the NDS and the intent to compete short of conflict, in both a contact force and a blunt 

force construct as it is played out in the NDS. 

I think there are extraordinary opportunities. You mentioned 

propaganda. I don’t know that I would term it as propaganda as 

much as competing in the information space against the extraordinary amount of disinformation, especially on the regional, kind of 

hegemonic level that we do need to counter in some way, shape, or 

form. And again, I think we will have the opportunity to do that 

going forward, and we look forward to it. 

Secretary WEST. Sir, let me just add that now that we have a budget, we have agreed with the State Department to launch a $15 

million pilot program alongside the GEC. And the basic goal between DOD and State is to align to the NDS. 

Mr. WILSON. As an indication of how important what you are 

doing, we have the Chairman of the Armed Services Committee 

here with us, Mac Thornberry. So whatever we can do in Congress, 

the leadership certainly is very attentive. And Secretary West and 

General Thomas, another significant concern is the high operational tempo that has been placed on SOCOM for a significant period of time. Could you describe the impact of programs like the 

Preservation of the Force and Family [POTFF] have had on the 

morale of soldiers and their families? And also, describe efforts to 

focus on mental health services being made available to service 

members. 

General THOMAS. Congressman, first and foremost, I am very 

grateful that several of my predecessors had the vision to see that 

this was going to be a protracted effort, both the current CT fight 

and really the other threats that have loomed for the country. And 

in seeing with that longer vision, they realized that we did not 

have the organic capability to sustain the force at the kind of 

tempo that we have been carrying now for a decade and a half. So 

in coordination with Congress, they endeavored to get the necessary funding to provide the Preservation of the Force and Family 

capabilities, which I would offer is, most importantly, the people 

that are involved, you know, the physical therapists, the social 

workers, the religious support folks, the psychiatrists—psychologists rather. Those are really the difference that is being made at 

the local level and our ability to sustain it. So again, thanks to my 

predecessors for setting that in motion. It is paying huge rewards 

for us in terms of sustaining the force. 

Mr. WILSON. And has there been an impact on recruitment with 

the emphasis on these programs? 

General THOMAS. I would offer more in sustainment. So recruitment, they may not know it ahead of time, but when service members and their families become part of our force, and it is probably 

most palpable every time I go to Walter Reed and I am able to talk 

to service members and their families on the back side in terms of 

the care coalition aspects that we are able to provide for them, that 
13 

they realize there is a distinct difference. One, we are encouraging 

service members, regardless of their injury, their illness, to stay in 

the force. And if they want to, we find ways to do that. And we 

are also able to sustain their families so they can, you know, work 

with us for the long haul. And again, it is almost indescribably 

powerful for our formation. 

Mr. WILSON. And I know that the facilities that you have developed have to—if a young person sees the world-class facilities that 

are being provided, it has just got to encourage people to remain 

in the service, but also recruiting. So it is just so meaningful. And 

just again, thank both of you for your service, and I yield back. 

Ms. STEFANIK. Mrs. Murphy. 

Mrs. MURPHY. Mr. West, General Thomas, thank you so much for 

being here today. And thank you, General Thomas, for taking a little time out of your schedule this morning to connect. In a prior 

life, I had the real honor to work for ASD SO/LIC in the SOCT 

[Special Operations & Combatting Terrorism] Directorate, and I 

have a deep appreciation for the capabilities that SOF brings to our 

national security. So thank you for all that you do. You talked a 

little bit about this in your opening remarks. Just given the new 

National Defense Strategy refocuses on great power conflict, will 

SOCOM seek to transition away from CVE [countering violent extremism] to other roles that more directly counter the military capabilities of peer competitors? And if so, what does that look like? 

Secretary WEST. Well, from one rookie to a veteran, I would say, 

as I said in the opening, that is a key question. I think, first of all, 

what is important, is sustaining the advantage that SOCOM has 

built up in countering VEO [violent extremist organizations]. But 

then along with many other programs and missions, we do have to 

become more austere. And so hard decisions have to be made in 

terms of when you begin to look from—essentially move from, I will 

use a start-up as an example, and you really begin to ask or assess 

what are diminishing returns, which are inevitable, against your 

spend. 

So, I think one of my basic tasks will be to work alongside General Thomas on the business administrative aspect of SOCOM. And 

part of that is just how he allocates his dollars and his mission 

prioritization. 

General THOMAS. Congresswoman, I would like to think we anticipated the NDS a little bit in regards to one specific peer competitor, and that was at the invitation of our European allies, folks 

who we worked with in Afghanistan and Iraq, we were invited several years ago to join them in enhancing their capabilities in Eastern Europe. So we have had a multiyear effort there that has already borne some pretty serious dividends. I think we have already 

flexed in that regard. It opened our eyes to some capabilities that 

we were probably deficient in that we needed to enhance above and 

beyond the great capabilities we had developed for countering violent extremism. But we are an organization in transformation constantly, and I would like to think that we are keeping pace with 

where the NDS wants us to go. 

Mrs. MURPHY. Great. And I look forward to continuing the conversation as you make that transition. You know I have had the 

pleasure of touring the SOFWERX a few times, and I am so im-
14 

pressed by it, I even brought colleagues down to take a peek at 

what you have got going on there. It is your business and technology incubator in downtown Tampa. I am just so very impressed 

every time I visit at how SOCOM uses flexible alternative contracting instruments like OTAs [other transaction authority] to such 

great effect. And I think when we think about some of the challenges that we are looking to address, having that ability to sort 

of hotwire the system a little bit and get into more rapid acquisitions is really important. And I have been impressed with your 

ability to do that. 

When I visited SOCOM headquarters late last year, I heard that 

your acting acquisition officer was detailed to CYBERCOM [U.S. 

Cyber Command] to help stand up their acquisition authority. Can 

you talk a little bit about SOCOM and CYBERCOM’s relationship, 

particularly as it relates to sharing best practices in acquisitions? 

General THOMAS. Congressman, first of all, thanks for your interest in SOFWERX. And if I could actually go back to a question that 

the chairwoman asked about RDT&E [research, development, test, 

and evaluation], because truthfully, there was an internal tension 

in our command on, are we putting sufficient money there? And so 

it is very prominent. But I would offer platforms like SOFWERX, 

other people’s money, our ability to leverage academia, and then 

truthfully, as we are working with the Department, we had Ellen 

Lord down recently, and it struck me as she talks about $5 trillion 

worth of programs over the FYDP [Future Years Defense Program], 

that SOCOM needs to do a better job of leveraging the heft of the 

Department as it is swinging larger RDT&E dollars. So we are focused on it, but there are a couple different platforms. 

SOFWERX is unique, as you described. And we have been able 

to parlay it. Originally, I don’t think it was seen as something that 

was either scalable or exportable, and it has become both. Scalable 

in terms of how it is assisting other services. The Army has used 

it to look at ground mobility vehicles, weapons, things like that. On 

our RDT&E back, which, again, it is a great cooperative effort. Exportable in terms of you mentioned CYBERCOM. It is also exportable to our foreign partners. We are able to share much more extensively right now. On your specific point of the relationship with 

CYBERCOM, you know, Admiral Mike Rogers and I have had kind 

of a historic relationship, very positive one from growing up together. But he encouraged us at Special Operations to leverage 

cyber in everything we are doing. He knows that SOCOM has an 

attractiveness in terms of an operational approach that is not irresistible, but it certainly—it forces considerations. So cyber operations is integral to everything we do. And we continue to enhance 

the relationship with them, most recently, in trying to help them 

with their acquisition process. 

Ms. STEFANIK. Time has expired. Mr. Hice. 

Mr. HICE. Thank you, Madam Chair. General Thomas, you mentioned a while ago the Preservation of the Force and Family. I am 

very much interested in that. Of course, there is so much stress on 

our warriors and their families. I think this is a great program that 

now is 5 years old. You mentioned it is dealing with physical, mental, social, and spiritual well-being. And that program expires this 

year, although a request for proposal has just come out this week. 
15 

To begin, after 5 years now what have you learned from this program? And does the new request, what kind of changes are being 

proposed? 

General THOMAS. Congressman, I think as a learning organization, with the establishment of the Preservation of the Force and 

Family program, we really hinged it on four pillars: psychological, 

spiritual, social, and human performance aspects. And so, we have 

been able to refine that over time as much driven by our operators, 

as most of our successes are, where they are able to refine both the 

requirements, but also, the ability to sustain the force over time. 

So again, it builds in resilience on the front end. And as we employ this force, and then parallel to that is our care coalition, which 

enables us to conduct an incredibly thorough Warrior Care Program for those who unfortunately become wounded, ill, or injured. 

So, in parallel, both those programs are keys to our sustainment 

going forward. We are continuing looking to how we can enhance 

that program. So I probably can come back to you with some more 

specifics. But it is an iterative program inside of what we have 

been doing very capably for the last couple of years. 

Mr. HICE. So are you aware of any significant changes from what 

is being proposed now from 5 years ago? 

General THOMAS. I don’t think significant changes. I think probably a point that I should bring out to you is, again, imitation 

being the finest form of flattery, the other services are going to 

school on what we are doing and trying to implement it. And we 

are trying to share that as aggressively as possible. So I think we 

are onto something that is positive for not only our force, but for 

the larger Department. And I will get back to you on some specifics 

that we are considering. 

[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix on 

page 65.] 

Mr. HICE. Thank you. Mr. West. 

Secretary WEST. I was just going to say, sir, not to be a force of 

negativity, but part of my job will be and is to scrutinize P–11 programs, or SOF-peculiar programs like this, where the services have 

something that looks like it, but not quite. I usually dive into the 

statistics. And the statistics I have seen so far are really good. I 

am sure we will get into the results of the cultural survey that was 

commissioned about 3 months ago here. But my initial cut at the 

data says that something is working well, and I would have to 

point to this program as among, say, of the flagship programs that 

I would think has a big impact. 

Mr. HICE. That is really encouraging to hear. Would you say, 

while you are up here, that between the four pillars that they are 

fairly well balanced, or is there an imbalance and emphasis in one 

area over the other? 

Secretary WEST. I don’t know, sir. I don’t know, sir. 

Mr. HICE. General, would you? 

General THOMAS. Congressman, I think it is pretty balanced. 

Where we are I think endeavoring to develop, because we are 

learning, is in the human performance domain. I think there is a 

lot of uncharted ground there. We have sports teams going to 

school on us, professional teams going to school on what we are 
16 

learning. So I think it is indicative of an environment where there 

is some real opportunities, but we haven’t developed them yet. 

Mr. HICE. I think it is really encouraging that this program is 

even here. The importance of taking care of these warriors and 

their families is just huge. And hats off to you for taking this seriously, and for doing a good job, and the fact that statistically, there 

are evidence to back up that this is succeeding in what its mission 

and purpose is. It is very encouraging. So I thank you very much 

for that. And I yield back. 

Ms. STEFANIK. Thank you, Mr. Hice. We will now go to the second round of questions. General Thomas, you touched upon this in 

response to Mrs. Murphy’s question, but as I mentioned in my 

opening statement, we know that our near-peer adversaries are investing in the development of AI, synthetic biology, quantum computing. And again, we are the Emerging Threats Subcommittee, so 

we are looking to the future to ensure that we maintain the edge 

when it comes to these technological tools. With that said, can you 

describe, and you said there was back and forth within SOCOM, 

why the budget request decreases our R&D investments for the 

second year in a row? 

General THOMAS. Chairwoman, I probably didn’t address that accurately in that while there is tension for where and how we are 

spending our money, I am comfortable that we are sufficiently immersed in R&D efforts with both our allotted money, other people’s 

money, and other platforms. So I can probably give you a more 

comprehensive laydown where I guess the proof of the point is, I 

can’t tell you an area that I think we are lacking in terms of spending authority to pursue RDT&E. 

On the specifics of machine learning, that is a great example, because there is probably nothing I am more passionate about right 

now than the opportunities that SOCOM has to leverage machine 

learning to an extraordinary level. We had the innovation group 

come to us with Admiral McRaven about a year and a half ago, and 

some senior folks from Google and Alphabet gave us rave remarks 

for our people, our ability to prototype, and then gave us less than 

satisfactory marks for machine learning. And we took it as a 

tasker. 

And since that time, we have poured a lot of energy, a lot of 

focus, more importantly, practical applications into everything we 

are doing. I devoured a book, ‘‘Machine, Platform, Crowd,’’ not too 

long ago by McAfee from up at MIT [Massachusetts Institute of 

Technology], that challenges corporations, but apropos to us, at 

every level and every mark, why you aren’t embracing machine 

learning. And I can tell you that is the ethos of our command right 

now as we are going forward. I really hope that we not only will 

we improve our own capabilities, but that it will be scalable to the 

Department as kind of an exemplar for what we can do. 

Ms. STEFANIK. So are we leveraging DARPA [Defense Advanced 

Research Projects Agency] and service R&D efforts? In what areas 

are they helping you the most? 

General THOMAS. Ma’am, I would probably be hard-pressed right 

now to tell you the specifics, but the answer is yes. Anybody and 

everybody who—I couch this free money, that is not meant to be 

kind of pejorative, it is folks that are doing similar lines of work 
17 

or similar interested areas, we are investing in. I think that the 

beauty of it and where it plays to our maybe us not having the 

RDT&E, is we provide platform, we provide the forum for applications of a lot of these prototypical efforts that I think creates kind 

of a symbiotic marriage of opportunity there. 

Ms. STEFANIK. And General Thomas, in terms of countering unconventional warfare [UW] threats, are we closer to linking all of 

our tools and capabilities, such as conventional, unconventional, 

economic, cyber, intel, and IO [information operations] in an effort 

to counter adversarial threats such as Russia? 

General THOMAS. Chairwoman, I would like to actually give you 

a few examples in the closed session afterwards, but the bottom 

line is yes. I think the unique approach of our joint task force, our 

inherent nature of who we are allows us to bring all those elements 

to bear in a coordinated, coherent fashion. So again, I will provide 

at least one very powerful vignette in the closed session, but we see 

and we leverage all those tools as part of what we do. 

Ms. STEFANIK. Thank you for that, General Thomas. And before 

I recognize Mr. Langevin, I just wanted to follow up on Secretary 

West’s comments regarding irregular warfare authority. Regarding 

section 1202 and the new unconventional warfare authority, I was 

pleased to see you commit to the delivery of the UW strategy in 

the opening statement, but I do want to emphasize for the record 

that without that strategy, there is no UW authority, which is why 

we have the 15-day notice and wait as well. So we look forward to 

talking about the strategy first before we move forward with the 

authority. And with that, I recognize Mr. Langevin. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. Thank you, Madam Chair. Secretary West, section 922 of the FY 2017 NDAA focused on solidifying and strengthening the roles and responsibilities of the Assistant Secretary of 

Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict to effectively conduct internal oversight of, and advocacy on behalf of 

SOCOM. I know you are new, you are just days on the job, but 

from your standpoint right now initially, what is the status of the 

implementation of 922, and what is the status of the report on implementation of 922 required by section 1074 of the FY 2018 bill? 

And as you know, Congress has expressed concern about inadequate resources being provided to ASD SO/LIC to fill roles and responsibilities. What efforts are underway to define and resource 

SO/LIC? 

Secretary WEST. Congressman, let me take your second question 

first. We will turn in that report on time. Another report was just 

mentioned. I like to meet deadlines. To your first question, the first 

thing I did was study the history. I think pathfinding requires, you 

know, where you are coming from to figure out where you are 

going. It is clear this was almost a 30-year culminating point, 922 

specifically. And I think it is very timely. In the backdrop of Secretary Mattis calling for business reform as one of his three pillars, 

I think this reinvigoration is long overdue. 

General Thomas has a really unique role in that he is a very 

busy COCOM [combatant command] commander with three separate global synchronization hats. And then now at $13.6 billion, he 

and we now are heading a Fortune 500 enterprise. So on the business leadership front, I think the basic task is to institutionalize 
18 

what SOCOM does very well and preserve its unique attributes. 

The chairwoman mentioned, for instance, DARPA. I think there 

are four or five other areas at DOD that looks very much like 

DARPA. So one of our tasks will be within the building to connect 

this thriving enterprise in Tampa Bay to the federation. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. General Thomas, and both Secretary West, can 

you describe how 922 has shaped the relationship between SOCOM 

and SO/LIC? Any further comments on that? General Thomas, you 

want to comment? 

General THOMAS. Congressman, as I mentioned in my preamble, 

we are embracing the 922 language as the natural evolution of the 

relationship between us and ASD SO/LIC. I have been interested 

in the specific language that places Assistant Secretary of Defense 

West in our chain of command to the Secretary for the man, train, 

and equip portfolio. And I am looking forward to developing the 

specific functions and interrelations there. But I think that will 

help us be better integrated with the Department going forward. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. Thank you. General Thomas, in December you 

were quoted on the devastating effects Task Force Aries delivered 

when synchronized with other military and intelligence partners. 

Despite these types of operations, you mentioned that we are not 

fully where you would like to be with these capabilities. Can you 

please describe your cyber requirements? How is USSOCOM synchronizing and coordinating with U.S. Cyber Command? And do 

you find you have more policy and authority challenges or commanders who have difficulty integrating the capability in the cyber 

realm? 

General THOMAS. Congressman, again, we enjoy an extraordinary and historic relationship with CYBERCOM. The level of support is almost indescribably powerful. When I mentioned and contrasted very successful operations there relative to areas that I 

think we can improve, it is really emphasizing that in the counter 

violent extremist mission set, we have been able to break ground 

and really be a pathfinder for new and developmental capabilities 

that I think need to be carried over to other mission sets, to other 

operational domains that I think Mike Rogers would agree, we 

need some iterations, we need some reps [representatives] in those 

environments, which we have had a good number in countering violent extremism, but I think they could be passed across, and we are 

trying to do that. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. Very good. Thank you. And General Thomas, 

what is the situation with North Korea? How has that impacted 

the force? And is SOF prepared to respond to a crisis on the peninsula? 

General THOMAS. Congressman, as part of the joint force, we are 

always endeavoring to be prepared for any and all contingencies. 

So suffice it to say, we are training, as we always have, to be prepared for that contingency, among others. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. And I will probably have some follow-up on the 

closed session on that. With that, I yield back. 

Ms. STEFANIK. Mr. Hice. 

Mr. HICE. Thank you, Madam Chair. At this time I have no further questions. 

Ms. STEFANIK. Mrs. Murphy. 
19 

Mrs. MURPHY. Madam Chair, I will also reserve for the closed 

session. 

Ms. STEFANIK. Thank you very much. We will now move into 

closed session. 

[Whereupon, at 3:00 p.m., the subcommittee proceeded in closed 

session.] 

A P P E N D I X 

FEBRUARY 15, 2018 

PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

FEBRUARY 15, 2018 

(25) 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING 

THE HEARING 

FEBRUARY 15, 2018 

(65) 

RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MS. STEFANIK 

Secretary WEST. In the FY 2019 budget rollout, DOD indicated that the FY 2020 

DOD budget and future plan are to reduce reliance on OCO significantly. 

USSOCOM will be a part of that shift from OCO to the base budget. Congressional 

support is critical in shifting OCO to the base budget. OCO constitutes one-third 

of USSOCOM’s FY 2019 budget request. At this time, we believe that approximately 

90 percent of USSOCOM’s requested OCO is enduring. 

Increasing base funding will result in more effective implementation of readiness 

and modernization efforts over the long term. For example, it will improve procurement of warfighter equipment (e.g., special operations forces (SOF) fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft modernization; SOF maritime undersea and surface capabilities; 

intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR); and tactical vehicle modernization). In terms of readiness, it will improve SOF combat units’ ability to plan and 

implement training in a reliable and consistent manner. [See page 9.] 

RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. HICE 

General THOMAS. The command conducted extensive market research in order to 

ensure we have captured both lessons learned from the current POTFF programs 

and contract, but also from other major source selections the command has recently 

executed and modified the RFP accordingly. Some of the most significant changes 

are outlined below. We experienced performance issues and turnover related to the 

disparate salaries offered for the same labor categories and at times within the 

same geographic locations by the various companies supporting these requirements. 

We did not anticipate that some subcontractors would pay 20%-30% less annually 

than others. Additionally, direct salaries have in some instances limited our ability 

to fill positions, either because they are much lower than those offered by other 

agencies or too low for incentivizing performance in remoter locations such as Cannon AFB, NM. Therefore, the RFP includes additional requirements for a more indepth price analysis focused on the total direct compensation offered to employees, 

regardless of which prime or subcontractor is providing the employee in order to ensure commensurate compensation packages are being offered across all team members (both prime and subcontractors) and the surrounding labor markets, as well 

as ensuring they will have the ability to retain the current incumbent personnel 

IAW FAR provision 52.222–46. Failure to effectively manage subcontractors to ensure consistency in the support across the entire POTFF program has caused several performance challenges. Therefore, the RFP and the Government Quality Assurance and oversight processes include a greater emphasis on subcontract management and holding the prime contractor accountable for their subcontractor performance. This includes such things as requiring offerors to address how they will ensure 

the proper flow down of all contract requirements, handle subcontractors who are 

performing poorly, or those team members that are unable to effectively retain or 

recruit personnel. Moreover, offerors will be required to ensure processes and procedures are standardized across their team as well as describe how their retention 

plans will ensure the ability to maintain the required technical expertise and allow 

for developmental growth/career progression. Five years ago, the RFP had a larger 

focus on ensuring the companies (holistically across their proposed team) demonstrated extensive knowledge of both the various Special Operations units being 

supported and the POTFF programs (i.e. both Human Performance Programs and 

the Psychological Resiliency). However, we found that although they should still 

have some understanding of the SOF non-traditional training environment, it is not 

as essential to have companies who are ‘‘experts’’ in the POTFF domains or SOF 

units, but rather just expertise resident in the key personnel proposed to perform 

the recruiting and vetting of the service providers that understand the qualifications 

(i.e. having an Operational psychologist background). Additionally, companies that 

have demonstrated experience in the human resource-like functions (recruiting, 

managing credentials, etc.) Therefore, the RFP includes language that focuses more 

on the recruitment and retention of personnel rather than the knowledge of existing 

programs. Offerors are now required to provide labor rates for all 21 labor categories 
66 

across all 26 geographical locations in order to avoid delays and the possibility of 

paying unreasonably high labor rates once we are in a sole source environment post 

award. The transition requirements were very different 5 years ago when we were 

first establishing the ‘‘enterprise’’ contract. The number of current incumbent personnel from existing contracts that were being consolidated into the enterprise was 

much lower than the number of incumbent personnel currently working under the 

current POTFF contract (approx. 346). Therefore, the RFP contains a greater emphasis on transition and ensuring the offeror’s plan demonstrates an understanding 

of and the ability to retain those critical ‘‘No Fail’’ incumbent positions (identified 

within PWS, Appendix 2) and how they will mitigate the risks associated with the 

loss of those existing relationships that have been built over time within the components. The revised Performance Work Statement contains revised qualifications for 

some existing labor categories, the removal of one labor category and five new labor 

categories that were identified by the component commands and to support emerging POTFF initiatives. The new categories include the following: 

• Neuropsychologist: To support SOF neurocognitive psychological baselining efforts 

• Data Scientist I & II: To replace the baccalaureate trained ‘‘Data Analyst’’ labor 

category on the previous POTFF contract. The POTFF requires a higher level 

of analytic capability than previously provided. The Data Scientists I & II require a masters degree and Ph.D. respectively. 

• Psychometrist: To support SOF neurocognitive and psychological baselining, 

and assessment/selection activities. 

• Psychiatric Nurse Practitioner: To address specific gaps in access to care. Primarily for medication/medical management. 

• Senior Strength & Conditioning Specialist: To provide greater responsiveness to 

a units’ requirements. 

[See page 15.] 
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING 

FEBRUARY 15, 2018 

(69) 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. SPEIER 

Ms. SPEIER. General Thomas, you mentioned SOCOM’s continued coordination 

with embassies in countries and regions where SOCOM is present. How might cuts 

to FY19 State Department funding impact SOCOM’s missions around the globe? 

How would an increase in defense funding with a simultaneous decrease in diplomacy funding affect the success of these missions in FY19/20 and in fiscal years to 

come? 

General THOMAS. The SOCOM position is that there will be no direct impact to 

SOCOM’s ability to carry out missions around the globe. However, if Embassy staffing is impacted by a lack of funding, some of SOCOM’s specific missions could be 

indirectly and negatively impacted on a case-by-case basis. Politically sensitive missions in certain host nations require embassy oversight and coordination. A shortfall 

in staffing could slow or even disrupt execution. Additionally, there is a potential 

that staffing shortfalls could lead to greater DOS/USEMB reliance on SOCOM elements that work within embassies and have operational funding like Military Information Support Teams (MISTs) and Civilian/Military Support Elements (CMSEs). 

A reduction of embassy staff could potentially degrade or make it more difficult to 

coordinate w/host nation personnel for proposed SOF activities (e.g. Joint Combined 

Exercise Training (JCET) and Counter-Narcotics Training (CNT) events). Additionally, any cuts to Title 22 funding overseen by the State Department may negatively 

impact host nation willingness and ability to cooperate with SOCOM, as well as degrade future performance of host nation forces.’’ Strategically, any diminution in the 

U.S. government’s ability to drive diplomatic solutions to today’s problems, due to 

decreased staff, funding, programs, will likely mean conflicts and the conditions that 

lead to conflict will endure, and SOCOM’s ops tempo and deployments will be affected. 

Ms. SPEIER. General Thomas, USSOCOM continues to use ‘‘live tissue training,’’ 

which uses live animals for teaching combat medics, a practice abandoned by virtually every U.S. hospital and medical school due to its high cost and the rise of 

more effective simulators and virtual reality for training. How much did SOCOM 

spend on live tissue training in each of the last five fiscal years? How much does 

SOCOM intend to spend on this training in FY18? How many animals were killed 

for SOCOM’s live tissue training exercises in the past five fiscal years? To what extent has SOCOM evaluated the long-term cost savings that would result from 

switching to simulators for medical training? What was the finding of this evaluation? 

General THOMAS. A single funding breakdown solely for live tissue training (LTT) 

is not available. USSOCOM does not conduct or fund live tissue training as a separate activity from Medical Readiness Training. (Medical Readiness Training, as defined in DODI 1322.24, includes all training for personnel, medical or non-medical, 

to treat combat wounds and injuries; has both initial and sustainment requirements.) The resources used to conduct LTT are the same facilities, ranges, instructors, support personnel, vehicles, equipment, and supply items necessary to conduct 

non-animal based medical readiness training. These resources are used throughout 

the ‘‘crawl, walk, run’’ progression of medical readiness training, of which LTT is 

a small, but critically important component. The following numbers represent the 

number of live animal models used by USSOCOM personnel for the years that documents are maintained. All activities are conducted in accordance with animal welfare regulations and policies, approved by an Institutional Animal Care and Use 

Committee (IACUC), and use humane euthanasia per the American Veterinary 

Medical Association (AVMA) Guidelines for the euthanasia of animals: 

FY2017: animals used = 5,244; personnel trained = 7,261 

FY2016: animals = 6,428; personnel trained = 9,823 {note: includes Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE) training and animals used in field training} 

FY2015: animals = 6,469; personnel trained = 9,925 {note: includes SERE training 

and animals used in field training} 

Note: DODI 3216.01, Use of Animals in DOD Programs, directs animal use 

records be retained for three years beyond the end of the RDT&E or training event. 
70 

Since 2015, USSOCOM has actively pursued high-fidelity, medical simulation and 

virtual reality training technologies through our annual broad agency announcements and technical experimentation events. Additionally, USSOCOM has worked 

with the DOD Program Executive Officer—Simulation, Training, and Instrumentation (Joint Program Manager—Medical Modeling & Simulation) and the Defense 

Health Agency’s (DHA) Joint Program Committee (JPC)-1 in an effort to develop 

and employ the most advanced medical modeling and simulation technologies available. The following figures represent the DOD Science and Technology Medical Simulation investment portfolio provided by the Director, JPC–1 in reference to the 14 

Feb 2018 HASC briefing: 

FY12—$44.3M; FY13—$20.0M; FY14—$16.8M; FY15—$20.5M; FY16—$24.0M; 

FY17—$23.5M; FY18—$20.0M; FY19—$28.0M (projected) 

Many of the currently available medical simulation tools are the products of Department of Defense investments (e.g., MATT® Series 1500 Trauma Trainer, 

AirwayPlus Lifecast (APL) Upper Torso Trainer® (Kforce Government Solutions, 

Inc.), and the TraumaMan®System (Simulab Corporation)). 

USSOCOM will continue to support the Department’s efforts to move towards 

training simulator technologies where a synthetic patient model could fully replace 

the use of animals in USSOCOM’s combat casualty care training curricula. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. WILSON 

Mr. WILSON. Secretary West, I would like to discuss some of your efforts in information operations. Specifically, what I am concerned about is the dispersion of extremist elements from the Middle East as our military efforts against ISIS and alQaida continue to be successful. Many of these individuals are fleeing to Europe, 

Africa and Central Asia and attempting to reconstitute operations in those areas. 

Part of reconstituting operations includes disseminating extremist propaganda and 

attempting to radicalize and recruit locals in those areas. Are you concerned about 

this? What are we doing to establish information operations in these areas to 

counter the propaganda and recruitment efforts of extremist organizations? Is this 

enough? 

I am particularly concerned about Africa and I feel that you must have the capability to rapidly establish information operations to counter threats as they arise. 

To ensure that approaches and messages are appropriate to the varied languages 

and cultures in areas of Africa targeted by extremists, effective information operations should leverage the unique abilities of local nationals to develop locally tailored platforms and messages. SOCOM has leveraged such a model with significant 

success, resulting in message dissemination that undermines extremist activities 

and messages within hours, not days. Integral to this model is a monitoring and 

evaluation system that allows SOCOM to closely, and in near real time, monitor the 

messages themselves, and their impact. What do you need to replicate this model 

in other operations? 

In your opinion, what, if any, changes to authorities might help you conduct more 

effective information operations? 

Secretary WEST. The Department of Defense (DOD) remains concerned about violent extremist organizations’ efforts to propagandize, radicalize, and recruit in Europe, Africa, and Central Asia as we militarily defeat ISIS and al-Qaeda. DOD has 

already been conducting Military Information Support Operations (MISO) to counter 

radicalization and recruitment in those areas either directly or working by, with, 

and through our allies and partners. The Secretary of Defense recently directed U.S. 

Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) to consolidate DOD’s MISO web operations into a global operating model in support of the Geographic Combatant Commands to expand the competitive space against our adversaries in contested zones. 

USSOCOM will leverage its unique abilities and previous lessons learned as DOD 

develops the implementation plan for this effort. The DOD has sufficient statutory 

authority to conduct information operations. 

Mr. WILSON. General Thomas, it seems to me that rapid response is especially important in spaces where violent extremists, Russians, and other foreign actors are 

able to influence the information environment much more quickly than we are. I 

have taken note of an information operations model that SOCOM is leveraging that 

has been particularly effective. It includes training and otherwise enabling trusted 

local nationals—who fluently speak the language with the proper dialect and intimately understand local history and customs—to develop and amplify messaging 

that undermines extremist activities and messages. This model enables rapid relevant responses to destabilizing messages and events in near real-time, not days or 

weeks, while simultaneously allowing SOCOM to closely monitor messages and im-
71 

pact. Our European allies are also leveraging a similar model with great success. 

What steps are you taking to replicate this model and share these best practices 

with other commands within DOD that engage in information operations? 

General THOMAS. USSOCOM deploys Military Information Support Teams (MIST) 

to conduct Military Information Support Operations (MISO) in direct support of Geographic Combatant Commanders’ (GCC) military objectives—within and outside of 

areas of hostilities—with Chief of Mission concurrence. This support includes advising and assisting partner nations’ information professionals—who fluently speak 

local languages with the proper dialect and intimately understand local history and 

customs—to develop and amplify messaging that undermines adversary activities 

and increases our partners’ abilities to effectively address shared security concerns 

in their regions. Finally, USSOCOM leverages experience developing counter terrorism MISO programs to assist GCCs as they develop MISO programs that provide 

authorities under which combatant commanders can more quickly and effectively 

plan and execute MISO in support to achieve their assigned missions. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. LAMBORN 

Mr. LAMBORN. Do you think section 922 of the FY17 NDAA gave you the tools 

you need to be effective in providing oversight of USSOCOM or does this committee 

need to do more to assist you? 

Secretary WEST. The DOD is continuing to look at how to best implement 922 as 

an important component of the new NDS’s emphasis on reform. SO/LIC has completed a number of important actions that lay the groundwork for full and successful implementation of Section 922. Examples include: 

• The Deputy Secretary of Defense designated ASD(SO/LIC) as a member of the 

Deputy’s Management Action Group (in addition to membership by the Under 

Secretary of Defense for Policy). 

• The Deputy Secretary of Defense designated ASD(SO/LIC) as a participant in 

selected Special Access Programs Oversight Council meetings. 

• The Deputy Secretary of Defense delegated to ASD(SO/LIC) approval authority 

for selected civilian personnel actions equivalent to Military Department Secretaries. 

• The Deputy Secretary of Defense approved formal establishment of the Special 

Operations Policy and Oversight Council (SOPOC) and approved a Department 

of Defense Directive on the SOPOC. 

• The Deputy Secretary of Defense provided fiscal guidance to ASD(SO/LIC). 

Additionally, over the next year, ASD(SO/LIC) expects to approve USSOCOM’s 

budget submission and jointly approve guidance documents 

Mr. LAMBORN. Specifically, what has your office done to assess USSOCOM’s Preservation of the Force and Families (POTFF) program? Based on your substantial 

background in the business sector, do you think a personal services contract is the 

best approach? What are the lessons learned from the previous five years that you 

want SOCOM to implement during your tenure as ASD SO/LIC? 

Secretary WEST. OSD has conducted several assessments of USSOCOM’s POTFF 

Program in which SO/LIC either participated or provided coordination. Specifically, 

the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel & Readiness commissioned a 2015 MITRE Corporation study of USSOCOM’s POTFF Program. In addition, the Office of the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) 

is currently completing an evaluation of the POTFF Program. SO/LIC was provided 

the completed MITRE report and will also receive CAPE’s findings. We are committed to ensuring that USSOCOM’s POTFF Program is an effective and properly 

resourced and managed program with appropriate SO/LIC oversight. 

Per 10 USC § 1091, personal services contractors are authorized for the POTFF 

Program. As medical professionals, and due to the embedded nature of POTFF Program personnel, it is important that POTFF Program personnel are under continuous supervision and control of a Government officer or employee. Moreover, as 

when credentialed by the medical treatment facility, liability concerns dictate the 

use of personal services contractors. However, DOD is fully committed to ensuring 

that USSOCOM’s POTFF Program is an effective and properly resourced and managed program that is subject to appropriate SO/LIC oversight. 

One of the most important lessons learned is demonstrating return on investment 

(ROI) of U.S. taxpayer dollars, and so we are interested in the long-term ROI of the 

POTFF Program in order to evaluate the existing program more thoroughly and improve the effectiveness of POTFF efforts. What is required is statistical tracking. 

USSOCOM is synchronizing efforts to identify and capture relevant statistical data 

more accurately to show long-term ROI. We will work with USSOCOM to ensure 
72 

the POTFF Program’s effectiveness in supporting special operations forces’ readiness. Mr. LAMBORN. This committee has been briefed on the benefits of the POTFF program and the associated metrics of success. The briefings seem to center on the special operator’s physical enhancements. What seems missing from every briefing to 

date, are the metrics and outcomes associated with the behavioral health part of the 

program. What are the behavioral outcomes you are trying to achieve with the program and how are you measuring them? 

General THOMAS. It is important to note that all of SOCOM’s clinical behavioral 

healthcare personnel are funded by the Defense Health Agency and privileged to 

practice through local Medical Treatment Facilities. With this in mind, the DOD 

and Services have required processes for monitoring quality and effectiveness for behavioral health providers. The command does monitor rates of diagnoses, suicide behaviors, and access to care among other indicators. Since the implementation of 

POTFF, the rates of depression, Post-traumatic stress, and alcohol abuse have remained stable or in some instances declined. Notably, the number of suicides has 

dropped by nearly 70%. 

The command is currently developing and testing technologies and processes for 

conducting psychological and neurocognitive assessments for SOF. This data will 

promote early intervention and also provide a solid foundation of data from which 

the command may assess the effectiveness of POTFF and other programs. 

Mr. LAMBORN. Is participation in the POTFF program mandatory? If so, how do 

measure participation and how does the data makes its way into the special operator’s official medical record? What happens with the family support data? 

General THOMAS. Participation in the Human Performance Program is mandatory. All operators must be assessed twice a year using criteria specific to SOF, and 

based on those assessments Human Performance Programs are customized to the 

needs of the individual operator. Other aspects of the program, such as behavioral 

health, are voluntary, but encouraged by leaders at all levels. Since beginning the 

POTFF in 2012, the number of SOF having used behavioral health has doubled and 

POTFF’s embedded service providers routinely rank highest in satisfaction and utility when compared with other sources of behavioral healthcare. We believe that the 

presence of behavioral health providers embedded within the units, along with leadership support, has impacted the stigma of seeking care. Although we still have 

work to do in this area, we have made significant progress. 

Many of the professional disciplines within the POTFF are credentialed medical 

providers. These providers include: physical therapists, athletic trainers, performance dieticians, social workers, psychologists and nurse case managers. As such, 

these providers are required to document their clinical work in the electronic health 

record. The local credentialing authority, typically the medical treatment facility 

commander, also provides routine quality assurance and oversight as with any other 

medical provider on an installation. 

With regard to family support data, aside from the authority granted to SOCOM 

to conduct family programs, the command is unable to support family support activities. This limitation was reinforced by Congress in 2014. For those programs that 

SOCOM is permitted to execute under Title X Sec 1788a, each activity is assessed 

and reported to Congress annually. SOCOM also works closely with the Services 

and OSD’s Office of Family Policy to meet the needs of our families. OSD and the 

Services have been highly responsive to SOCOM’s requirements. 

Mr. LAMBORN. Do you think the Services should adopt a POTFF-like program to 

support their respective forces and families? 

General THOMAS. The Services would likely benefit from adopting a POTFF-like 

capability tailored to their particular needs. SOCOM has engaged with each of the 

Services, OSD and partner nation forces regarding the structure and programmatic 

details of the POTFF program. Currently, each of the Services is planning or testing 

some variant of the POTFF program. SOCOM implemented the POTFF to specifically address pressures on special operations personnel and their families. While the 

stressors and occupational requirements for service members and families within 

the conventional forces may differ somewhat from those experienced by SOF, the 

underlying principles of POTFF are applicable in any military setting. Embedding 

multidisciplinary teams within tactical units, no matter the Service, is a sound approach to enhancing the quality of life and readiness of Service Members and their 

families. 

Mr. LAMBORN.As your senior in the administrative chain of command, what do 

you think ASD SO/LIC’s role should be in overseeing the promotions and professional military education compared to the Military Departments? 

General THOMAS. ASD SO/LIC should be afforded the opportunity to coordinate 

on Service changes to promotion and professional military education policies and 
73 

processes, prior to publication and implementation, to ensure SOF equities are considered. The latest assessment shows the majority of Special Operations Forces continue to experience promotion selection rates that are comparable to, or better than, 

the rates of their peers in the conventional forces. Additionally, professional military 

education opportunities for Special Operations personnel are adequately available in 

the appropriate Military department. 

Æ