The congressional defense committees have spent the past year evaluating the Goldwater-Nichols Act in a series of hearings where experts and former Pentagon officials made suggestions on how to streamline its organizational culture and, as expected, the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) led by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz) wants to make a range of ambitious, and likely controversial, overhauls.
One of the most bracing changes proposed by the committee is the dissolution of the under secretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics (AT&L), a position currently held by Pentagon chief weapons buyer Frank Kendall. Instead of designating one individual to be responsible for the whole of acquisition, the committee would divide duties among officials including a new under secretary of defense for research and engineering USD(R&E)—who would focus on technological innovation—and the renamed undersecretary of management and support, a key figure overseeing the business operations of the department.
In terms of Goldwater-Nichols reform, a key theme was “devolving” authorities further down the military and civilian chains of command, giving mid-tier officials more responsibility and decision-making power, committee aides told reporters on Friday.
“The organization of AT&L, it’s got a lot of pieces, it’s got many offices, and it’s focused on everything the department buys, all goods and services,” one aide said. “The intent was to essentially break those functions to the extent that we could.”
The aides shied away from saying exactly how much SASC had consulted with the Kendall or other Pentagon offices on the reforms, but repeatedly said the decision to eliminate AT&L was not a reflection of Kendall’s performance in the role.
“He’s doing a good job,” an aide said.
The office of USD(R&E) existed during the Cold War and helped guide the Second Offset, in which technologies like stealth and precision munitions were developed. The hope is that by re-establishing this position, the department can better focus on the innovative technologies it will need to leap beyond U.S. adversaries, in what the Pentagon terms its Third Offset strategy.
“It’s not the intent to just kind of go back to the way things were,” an aide said. “It is a recognition that the way the office had been focused in the past was able to prioritize innovation in a way that AT&L with all of its responsibilities struggles to do now. This is about taking an idea that once was, updating it and focusing it on the challenges that we face today.”
In addition, the bill would create a new Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition Policy and Oversight within the research and engineering office. While the USD(R&E) would basically serve as the “chief innovation officer,” the new assistant secretary would be responsible for setting policies related to the weapons buying process and conduct oversight.
According to the bill summary, the heads of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Strategic Capabilities Office, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, the Missile Defense Agency and the existing Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological Defense would all report to the USD(R&E). The research and engineering office would also interface with the services’ rapid capabilities offices and laboratories to hasten the development and acquisition of key technologies.
SASC members showed broad bipartisan support for their version of the National Defense Authorization Act, with only three senators opposing the bill. However, after lawmakers approve the NDAA on the Senate floor, McCain will be sent back to the drawing board, as he and House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry (R-Texas) resolve the differences between their two bills in conference committee.
The proposed legislation also tackles several other areas of organizational reform:
- National Security Council: The NDAA would limit the NSC staff to 150 permanently assigned staff and detailees from other government departments. According to aides, committee members oppose both the growing size of the council and its recent foray into operational concerns. The intent was to roll back the council to small, strategically focused, whole-of-government focused organization that would center on coordination and strategy development.
- Combatant Commands: Unlike the HASC, the Senate committee declined to establish U.S. Cyber Command as an independent, unified combatant command. Instead, it directs the department to conduct a pilot program take a single existing combatant command (COCOM) and replace the service component commands inside it with joint task forces focused on operations. “The Committee believes that this could provide lessons for improving the integration of operational efforts across the command, streamlining unnecessary layers of management, and reducing the number of staff.” The bill would also create a Combatant Commanders Council that would bring together all of the COCOMs, the defense secretary and the chairman and vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to discuss how strategy is being implemented worldwide.
- Strategy Documents: The bill eliminates the Quadrennial Defense Review and replaces it with a classified National Defense Strategy. It also makes National Security Strategy a classified document with an unclassified summary.
- Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: The bill falls short of reinstating the chairman into the chain of command, but would allow the defense secretary to delegate to the chairman some limited authorities to reallocate military assets on a short term basis.
- Cutting General and Flag Officers, DoD Staff: The NDAA contains language that would reduce general and flag officers by 25 percent, as well as limit the number of four-star positions. On the civilian side, the committee would also mandate a 25 percent reduction in the number of Senior Executive Service civilian employees in the Defense Department.