Opening Remarks by Gen. Steve Nordhaus, Chief, National Guard Bureau (As Prepared)
Before I provide my opening remarks, I ask that we remember our fallen service members across the Joint Force who made the ultimate sacrifice for our country. They will always be remembered.
Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member McCollum and esteemed members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today on the strength of your locally based, globally engaged National Guard.
I thank the 54 adjutants general and Senior Enlisted Advisor Raines for their counsel.
Moreover, I want to thank you, Congress, for your support that underpins everything we do, ensuring a stronger and more secure tomorrow.
It is an honor to represent the 435,000 Soldiers and Airmen of the National Guard. Today, more than 41,000 Guardsmen are engaged worldwide—securing our homeland and supporting every combatant commander around the globe.
Your National Guard has had a remarkable year, defined by the scale and simultaneity of our operations. We are powered by our core advantage: the Citizen-Soldier. They combine the warrior ethos with civilian-acquired skills, creating an organization that is as innovative as it is lethal—a force that is community based and engaged worldwide.
Defending the homeland is the Department of War’s No. 1 priority. This is the National Guard’s foundational mission. Our dual mission—serving as the primary combat Reserve of the Army and Air Force while also serving as the military’s first responders in domestic crises—is a challenge we accept.
Without hesitation, during Operations MIDNIGHT HAMMER and EPIC FURY, National Guard crews delivered decisive blows to Iran in lockstep with our joint partners.
In Operation ABSOLUTE RESOLVE, the National Guard fought against narco-terrorism. At home, we responded daily, totaling 2.4 million hours of direct support to our fellow citizens.
Your National Guard is an indispensable return on investment for America. We represent 20% of the Joint Force, yet we operate on less than 4% of the department’s budget—only 4%.
Our decisive response is only possible if our Citizen-Soldiers and Airmen train with modernized equipment, fully interoperable with the Joint Force. To sustain strategic dominance, we must modernize concurrently with our services to aggressively outpace and overmatch tomorrow’s threats with robust investments today.
This year, I remain laser-focused on sharpening our fighting edge to increase our Guardsmen’s readiness and bolster our capabilities for our core missions of homeland defense, warfighting and partnerships.
We must train and modernize in lockstep with the active components. This requires sufficient and predictable resources in flying hours, weapons systems sustainment, facilities sustainment, base operations support and NGREA.
When we use these resources to serve our citizens in a state active duty status, current policy sends reimbursement funds back to the Treasury. We ask for your support in restoring that readiness directly back to our formations.
Our warfighters are our most critical asset, and to support their service, we must enact duty status reform and compensate equal work with equal pay and benefits.
It is imperative that our warfighters are supported by a modernized and properly resourced full-time force. The antiquated dual-status technician program of the 1960s fails to support modern force structure, creating readiness gaps and workforce instability. Without a thorough revision of our full-time force, we jeopardize readiness for missions now, much less the increasingly complex requirements of the future.
The strength of the Citizen-Soldier and Airman is amplified through a network of partnerships, which begins in hometowns and reaches across the globe.
The jewel of this effort is the State Partnership Program, which connects the department with nearly 60% of the world’s countries at merely 1% of the theater security cooperation budget. Your help with flexible, multi-year budget authority will allow us to sustain the pace of these highly effective engagements.
While threats are unpredictable, our readiness is not. We are the indispensable core of the Joint Force, built to respond with speed, power and precision. We are stronger together because we are integrated at every level.
In closing, I want to again thank this committee. Your unwavering support ensures a secure tomorrow for all Americans. Let us continue to support and pray for our warfighters in harm’s way. We stand by them and their families and are thankful for their service.
We will always keep our promise to the nation and to our citizens to be Always Ready, Always There.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
Questions and Answers
Mr. Calvert: Now we'll go to questions. We'll hopefully get around to everybody, so we'll limit it to five minutes. I'll start with myself. First, make a comment. We all, as I've heard the comments about predictable funding, and I know that's important to all of you. I can, I think, say with support on both sides here that we, none of us, like continuing resolutions. And so we're going to work hard with a full committee chairman here and then the ranking member who worked very hard together to make sure that we have that predictable funding and that we hopefully can avoid continuing resolutions. One of the issues that's been important to live on our border state, the state of California, that's has been extremely important is the counterdrug program, and I appreciate the impact. Has had in our communities. Congress provided $305 million for the National Guard counterdrug program in fiscal year 26 and provide critical funding for training operations. And we've also provided an additional $30 million for the National Guard counterdrug school program, provide necessary education support combating drug trafficking efforts. As you know, hundreds of thousands of Americans have died of fentanyl poisoning over the last number of years. It's a horrible poison, as I call it, and this unfortunately has been inflicted upon the American population. So I appreciate what you're all doing, and General Nordhaus, how is the National Guard utilizing these resources to disrupt and degrade illicit drug production to make our communities safer?
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Chairman, thank you for the question and thank Congress holistically for the additional funds in this counterdrug program. Last year, the National Guard Counterdrug Program took off $15 billion of illicit drugs supporting our law enforcement. I can't imagine how many lives that has saved and families that has been kept together because those drugs have been taken off the street. Sixty-nine thousand other law enforcement agencies and agents have been trained. Through the counterdrug school program, which are funded through Congress. So we cannot thank you enough. Each of the states have a counterdrug program and each year is taking a look at of how they can better it to increase what they're getting after what's in the local area, whether it's fentanyl or other drugs and how they work with their local law enforcement agency. So each year we tune it up, we get better and stronger. The previous year we took off $13 billion and last year at $15 billion. So Every dollar you give the National Guard, you're getting huge bang for your buck because our Guardsmen are professional, they're experienced, they use their civilian skill sets and come into those programs and make us stronger.
Mr. Calvert: Well, thank you. And there's a lot of important missions that you do, but I think this is right on top of the list, so I appreciate anything you can do to do this. General, what priorities do you have in the coming years? We write this budget this year. If you had to pick your top two or three priorities, what would that be?
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Chairman, certainly as we look at foundational readiness accounts, to be and always ready, always there for us, and as you heard from the other Reserve component chiefs here, we're operational. And when you look at what the National Guard is doing in support of the Joint Force over in Operation Epic Fury, we have to be ready and trained, and the foundational readiness accounts really add to that. So that deals with flying hours, weapon system sustainment, and ops tempo. Also, as we look at modernization, we have to be in modernized equipment, whether it's helicopters or whether it is fighters, tankers, bombers or mobility aircraft. We have to have those capabilities. NGREA, once again, does an amazing amount that allows us to make sure that we're interoperable across the board with our services. And I know how important you heard all the comments from NGREA, so that would be my initial comments there, Chairman.
Ms. McCollum: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I've got two kind of topic questions, and you can get back to me with more information should you choose to, but I want to finish up a little more about what I said in my opening statements about the deployment of the National Guard. So the information that we have is that $605 million for the extended deployment of the National Guard troops for non-military activities. With the beautification of Washington, D.C. and I assume those activities will support America as we celebrate 250 years. And so they're here now. We'll have a lot of people visiting. I could see that being of comfort and joy for everyone, having the interaction with our men and women in uniform. However, that celebration is gonna end in July. And it's been reported that the Pentagon wants to keep the National Guard troops in through, as the ranking member of the full committee said, through January 2029. That's the end of the president's second term. That's well beyond the scope of this budget request. So the budget request for $260 million for the National Guard Reactionary Force is also something that this committee has been reading about in the paper to respond to incidents. So General Nordhaus, I have just a few questions for you, and if you have to get back with more information to the committee, truly understand. We look forward to it. How long do you see the deployments for the National Guard and law enforcement support role in D.C. Is sustainable? Because that $605 million in the request is all coming at the expense of something else that the National Guard will not be doing. And then regarding the National Guard Reactionary Force, I'd like some more information in detail and we had a little bit of a discussion in the office. But where is the funding coming from and contained in this budget? So we had brief discussion in office. I think you know what I'm going at.
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Oh, Ranking Member McCollum, thank you for your question. As we look at the D.C. Safe and Beautiful, certainly our primary focus is on the safety of our citizens. And as we look America 250 coming and FIFA, our National Guard will be ready to support in any of those locations through their governors and then here in D.C. through the Secretary from that. As we look at our National Guard, we continue to see our service men and women do amazing things in support of local law enforcement.
Ms. McCollum: Excuse me, sir, it pains me to interrupt you, but my time's limited. And so I asked about the funding contained in the budget for the National Guard Reactionary Force and the request of the $605 million that for what we're doing in D.C. That does come at the expense of something else in the line. So what are we not doing?
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Ranking Member McCollum, we are working with the Department and reimbursements from the Department, from DOJ and DHS. We will continue to work with this committee and we look forward to making sure that we can do all the mission sets that we've been directed to do and then also make sure that we can provide all the statutory training to the National Guard because we how critical it is.
Ms. McCollum: I'd like a detailed break out of the money and what training is not being done. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Yes, ma'am.
Mr. Cole: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and again to our witnesses, thank all of you. I too have budget concerns and requests, and you might not be in a position to give me a full answer. I certainly understand that. But I'm just going to kind of move down the list here and ask each of you, could you give us a quick overview of the role your component is playing, your respective area in the current military actions in Iran. And give us some view, because at some point I would expect a supplemental request to come from the administration in this regard, and you certainly need to be part of that supplemental. So, insofar as you can, give us an estimate of what sort of impact this has had on your budget to date. It's impossible to know the exact ending of something like this, so I wouldn't expect to give us anywhere near a complete estimate. But some sense of how much this has impacted you and what you might be, what we might need to extend to you to make sure that you can continue your operations uninterrupted in the other areas that you're responsible for. So I'll start General Nordhaus, if I may, with you and then just kind of move down the line if that's okay.
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Chairman, thank you for the question. As we look at the National Guard, certainly on the Air National Guard where 30 percent of the operational force, the Air Force, and to not get into specifics, we're at least that or above in support of the mission sets over in Epic Fury, whether it's in tankers, fighters, bombers, or mobility aircraft, and then logistics planning, ISR platforms across the board. Our Guardsmen are doing amazing work and making sure that we can take the fight to the adversary and but as we look at the budgets will continue to work with you and to bring those forward to make sure that we can continue to do all the mission sets and I will say also in the Army National Guard side they're doing amazing work as well on artillery and other things to take the fight to that adversary.
Mr. Cole: So I mean, just to follow up very quickly, you mentioned 30%, an extraordinary burden. Congratulations for discharging that. Would you estimate that, you know, just in general, that's what you would need? Let's just say we notionally had a $100 billion or whatever supplemental that you would need something in accordance to 30% of the total we would expend for air operations.
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Chairman, I'd like to get back to you, but that makes sense.
Mr. Cole: Fair enough. Look, I know this is not a fair question, and you can't possibly have the information, but yes, if you can get back to me, that would be helpful. You know, I've seen enough of these things to see sometimes we shortchange the Guard and Reserve, you know, we're asking a lot out of you. When the time comes to uh to get a supplemental, I just want to make sure that what goes in that supplemental adequately covers your needs. Any information you provide as we progress along, would be gratefully received.
Mr. Calvert: Thank you. And before I recognize the ranking member, I just want to agree with the chairman that we look forward to receiving the supplemental from the administration. And obviously, there's operational costs that's going to be that we need to recover in this. And I suspect O&M costs and additional costs. So I'm hoping that's reflected in the supplemental. With that, the ranking members, Ms. DeLauro.
Ms. DeLauro: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I understand that the Guard still flies over 200 Lima model Black Hawks, and they're scheduled to reach their end-of-service life into 2032. We have heard that the Army National Guard has validated a requirement of 225 Black Hawk aircraft. And for 2027, the budget only requests one Black Hawk for the active Army and zero for the National Guard. At the same time, the budget proposes that the CH-47 Chinook procurement drop from 11 to 5. The Guard flies both platforms in support of domestic missions every day, performing disaster response, medical evacuation, search and rescue on top of their overseas commitments. I have a question for General Nordhaus and for General Harter on this question. General Nordhaus, can you speak to the Guard's requirement for Black Hawks and whether your current aviation inventory is sufficient to meet mission demands? What do these procurement and modernization reductions mean in practical terms for what the Guard can do and cannot do?
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Ranking member DeLauro, thank you for the question. As we look at the National Guard and work with the Army, our Army aviation is critical across the board for all of our 54 and the mission sets that they do in the homeland and in the warfight. As we look at the oldest Limas, some that we will divest, it's a small percentage that we have to make sure that are double the price to fly, are hard to maintain. And so as we look at bringing in Mike models in transition, some of our Limas to Mikes that cascade down from other compos into the Army National Guard, and then also some Chinooks that come to us. And then what we want to do is be able to take that investment into the MV-75, that new platform with the Army. And so we feel very nested with General Leneve and Army as we go forward.
Ms. DeLauro: But the MV-75 is a ways off. And my question is, whether your current aviation inventory is sufficient now to meet mission demands? And what do the procurement and modernization reductions mean in practical terms for what the Guard can or cannot do? Do you have what you need? I mean, I understand what the transition is, but this is now. This is current. The MV-75 is... It's not a deployable prototype until the end of next year, probably. So where are you now?
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Yes ma'am, I think we're in an okay spot, but we need to make sure that we continue to bring other Mikes from the other compos into Army National Guard, make sure that we take the oldest aircraft that are twice as expensive and take that money to be able to put those parts and increase the rates on the Mike models and Limas that we do have as we bring new aircraft on in the future.
Ms. DeLauro: Well, it seems to me that we have a gap here, which I think we need to address, and we can't fully address it now, but I think we have a gap in what you need in terms of aviation requirements going forward, especially with what the President's budget looks like in terms of this area. I know people think that I have its parochial because we build the Black Hawks in my district, but you go from 24 to 1, Guard gets 0, Chinooks are down. So seems that we need some real analysis of where all of this is as we move forward.
Ms. DeLauro: 22 adjutant generals wrote to this committee on April 1st saying the Air Force needs a minimum of 72 new fighters per year just to begin reducing the average age of the fleet, and that cascading legacy aircraft from the active component to the Guard is not recapitalization. They have also noted that 13 of the 24 Air National Guard Fighter Squadrons remain programmed on F-16 post-block aircraft with no recapitalization plan on record. Yet, the budget again 2027 requests a total of 38 new fighters, barely half of the reported minimum requirement, and I do not see any of those aircraft specifically designated for Guard or Reserve in the budget documents. Significant gap between what the Reserve components have validated versus what the budget looks like they need to provide. Thank you very much. I'll ask both questions at the same time. General Nordhaus, current rate, when do the Guard fighter units begin transitioning to modern aircraft? How are you thinking about the path forward for those 13 Air National Guard squadrons still waiting recapitalization decisions?
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Thank you, ranking member. Your numbers that you talked about there, 13 of the 24, do not have a current plan. We certainly are working rapidly with the Air Force to find out what that fielding plan is in the future. We're currently looking at a couple MOBs, MOB 16 and 17, which will be F-35s. And then the F-15EXs come into several other wings in the future. But we need those additional aircraft in the Defense industrial base, o that we can have the aircraft that can come into our formation. As we see, fighters are critical. Our fighters were at Epic Fury, Absolute Resolve, Midnight Hammer. And so recapitalizing these Air National Guard fighter units is critical for our nation.
Mr. Fleischmann: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to each of you gentlemen. I had the privilege of meeting and greeting with each and every one of you today and your staffs. Profound thanks. Your questions, your testimony today has been impeccable. To the Reserve and Guardsmen in the office or in enlisted ranks, thank you so much for what you do every day, crisis after crisis. My questions are going to be largely related to all of you all. On the logistics and sustainment in the Indo-Pacific. As you've all laid out, Reserve components in the National Guard play a critical role in the Joint Forces' logistics and sustainability enterprise, including aerial refueling, strategic lift, fuel distribution, ground support, water purification, and other critical needs. My question for each of you, for the panel, what is the highest priority need for each of you so that we can realistically address in the next couple of years. That will meaningfully improve your logistics and capabilities to sustain prolonged combat operations in the Western Pacific. We can just go in whatever order you all determine.
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Congressman, for the National Guard, we look at probably the number one is tankers. So 14 of our 17 tanker units are in the KC-135. So those need to be modernized as we go into the future, concurrently with our Air Force. As we look also at connecting those platforms through NGREA funds and other things that we do to make sure those platforms are connected in that vast INDOPACOM theater. And then, certainly, thank you to Congress on the C-130Js. As we finish out, hopefully get to all J's here in the future. And then certainly any modernization that we can do with NGREA and the C-17 to make sure it's connected as well on that platform for that theater.
Mr. Cole: I agree with General Nordhaus with regards to the air refuelers as being our number one priority in the theater, using our NGREA dollars to make sure they got the online-to-side communication, ensuring they got LERCOM as the defensive system as well, converting the KC-46 as well so that we can use it as a force multiplier. I'd also add that continuing exercises as a Reserve component with the active component to ensure that we're completely interoperable in every type of O-plan excursion. And then lastly, the Air Force Reserve has a significant presence with our civil engineering and the ability to get out there and actually set the theater prior is one of our priorities. Thank you. Thank you, sir. I yield back.
Mr. Morelle: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen, thank all of you for your service to our country, and a special good wishes to you, General, and your wife, as you enter the next phase of your service and your life. I want to start, if I can, General Nordhaus. I serve at the – I have two responsibilities here, the intersection of both, which come together around a question I want ask you. Serve not only appropriations but as the ranking member on the Committee on House Administration, which has responsibility for federal elections. The president raised eyebrows a couple of months ago when he said he regretted not deploying the National Guard during the 2020 election. As you can imagine, that has caused considerable anxiety around the country, millions of Americans concerned about the deployment of military personnel at election centers, or at precincts throughout the country in the midterm elections. What assurances can you give not only to me, but the millions of Americans who have those concerns about the deployment of National Guard at polling places?
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Congressman, the National Guard obviously always follows constitution, law, policy and guidance both at the federal and the state level. Now, the National Guard has been utilized by governors really back in the 2020 and 2022 timeframe due to COVID-19, and it was due to a lack of volunteers. And so, Guardsmen had in multiple states done things in administration, logistics, and cyber, but they were always in civilian clothes, to my knowledge, and they were always in support so that those state polling stations could execute and our citizens could vote as normal. And so, as we go forward, you know that the National Guard is always going to follow the law, the Constitution, and all policy and guidance. And we're there to increase public trust and make sure that our citizens have the ability to do their duty of voting.
Mr. Morelle: Good. Well, I appreciate that. And I would love to stay in touch with you if anything untoward seems to be happening or any concerns are raised by people that they see warning signs that would suggest some non-traditional participation by the Guard in our national elections. But I do appreciate that and just want to raise it with you. If I could continue on a more traditional topic, General, As you know, the 109th airlift wing of the New York Air National Guard, and you and I have talked about this and always appreciate your stopping by the office and chatting, but it provides the military's only ski-equipped airlift capability, supporting critical operations in the Arctic and the Antarctic. The missions have become increasingly important as polar regions take on greater strategic significance. The President and others have talked it in global power competition and the LC-130 fleet is aging. I know I've shared this with you before. I wonder if you can give me an update on the strategic value of the 109th's polar mission and how we can recapitalize the LC-130 fleet, enhance their operational capabilities and align with broader national security priorities.
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Congressman Morelle, I actually went to the South Pole on New York's LC-130s, incredible aircraft as they upgraded to different props in the capabilities with the H models that they have. That capability to be able to have C-130's, whether it's in the Southern South Pole or whether it is in the Arctic is going to be critical going forward. We appreciate everything Congress does to move us in that direction and look forward to working with the Air Force and this body to make sure that... That capability remains strong and as we go into the future, it transforms at the appropriate time.
Mr. Morelle: Very good, sir. In my last minute, in 2021, General, three highly experienced New York Army National Guard pilots, Chief Warrant Officer Steve Skoda, Chief Warn Officer Daniel Priel, and Chief Warring Officer Christian Koch were tragically lost in a helicopter crash during a night training flight in my district, a stark reminder of the inherent risks in rotary wing training and operations. Any lessons learned from these incidents being incorporated into updated training protocols, simulator use, or crew coordination that we should know about.
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Congressman, let me just start off by, I'm a long time aviator, not only flying F-16s and F-35s, but flying for a major airline. And I have a son flying this morning, called me last night, he's doing a cross country because he's getting his pilot license. You can believe I'm talking safety all the time. This last week, I had the team in from both the Air National Guard and the Army National Guard. I do it quarterly to make sure we're looking at all the safety across the board. I'm happy to report that the National Guard, the Army National Guard has had no class A's in 25 or 26. It is a major focus of both the Army National Guard and the Air National Guard and across aviation that we have to learn these lessons from safety. We have to put them out. So they're doing standups on a regular basis to make sure that they're taking lessons learned from incidents that have happened recently and ones that have happen years ago. So as they do these standups, they can talk and they can remind even the newest pilots of how a little bit of loss in concentration or not understanding how something might affect the safety of their flight comes into play and it makes them better and more safe. And I'm seeing on the ground safety and on the air safety, both for Air National Guard and Army National Guard, the trends are down and going in the right direction.
Ms. Lee: I wanted to, being from the West, when I think about National Guard, I think of wildfires. And General, you know, we have a contingent of airmen from the 152nd Airlift Wing in Reno, that the High Rollers who have been deployed to Central Command. And I just wanted to ask General Nordhaus if those Guardsmen remain deployed. This has been a record year of no snowpack in the West. And I think one concern we have is preparation for what I believe will be a record wildfire year. And very concerning to me, what are the contingency plans, if they remain deployed throughout the summer and we see a wildfire breakout, especially in the Sierras?
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Congresswoman Lee, thank you for the question. Our National Guard does three of the four units of the mobile airborne firefighting systems. They do amazing work. I actually landed and was in California as they launched for the first missions on the Palisade fires. And they all came out to be able to do that. All eight of the aircraft and systems were put in place. So as we work with NFSE and with the department, we'll continue to watch that very closely and make sure that we have the right aircraft in the right place to get after and serve our nation to make sure that we can take care of those wildfires within our department and, of course, the Forest Service as well. Thank you.
Ms. Lee: Thank you. Speaking of equipment, the Nevada Air National Guard base has been fighting for years to recapitalize the C-130Hs, which would be helpful to its ability to continue to fight wildfires. And I understand that one of the points against the Nevada National Guard is deficient infrastructure to house the C-130Js. There's four infrastructure projects that have been identified as critical, but only one has the documentation to move forward. And I just want to ask if I can receive your commitment to work with me to advocate for the funding for the infrastructure needed to put the Nevada Air National Guard in a position to receive these C-130Js.
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Congressman Lee we’ll certainly work with Nevada and the incredible wings. I've been to both your wings and was recently down with General Waters down in Las Vegas as well. And I talked to General Pirak about the criteria. We do have MOB 12, which will be the stationing of another C-130J. And so we look forward to Nevada competing very strongly and working with your state.
Mr. Womack: Thank you. This is the money committee and so I'm going to talk money here for just a minute. In General Nordhaus the topic is state active duty reimbursement and I know you're well versed on it. And I want my colleagues around the dais who aren't familiar with this issue to understand it better because we need to fix it. If we truly care about these Reservists, this is an issue that needs to be fixed. But they're double-taxed when they're aiding our communities in response to an emergency. States reimburse the Guard for the services, but due to the Miscellaneous Receipts Act, a non-federal funding source paying a federal agency causes the funds to be deposited back in the Treasury, not in the Guard accounts. The Guard Bureau never sees that money. And then on the backside, the Guard still has to pay for the maintenance of that equipment. So, in Arkansas, this played out not long ago when Soldiers from our Fires Brigade, our Expeditionary Combat Aviation Brigade and our Infantry Brigade all in response to a winter storm, operated 66 federal vehicles in support of emergency services, Arkansas State Police and the state reimbursed the federal government about 20,000 for that equipment use. But instead of that money going to maintaining those vehicles, it's now sitting in the Treasury's General Fund. That doesn't seem very wise to me. And it's not just in Arkansas. It's playing out all across the country. General Nordhaus, can you elaborate on just how much of an issue this is to the already constrained budget of our Guard?
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Congressman Womack, first off, thanks for allowing me to visit Arkansas last week. Amazing time there and for our office call. You talked about the 15 states in the western with the winter storm, but we also have Hawaii going on right now with their flooding, and Guam is now responding to the typhoon. Wisconsin right now has storms up there, and so they have Guardsmen responding. So each one of these across the 54, it happens every year these funds go to the treasury instead of back into the Guard units so that we can get the equipment back up to speed so when the next winter storm happens or the next flood or tornado or hurricane or event that we can respond quickly, we're ready and we're there for you. And without that we're losing those funds or going to other things that we can't keep the equipment up to where it needs to be.
Mr. Womack: Yeah, I was going to ask a question about NGREA, but I just want to say this because I got another question on another topic that's more important to me right now. And that is, for the first time, Mr. Chairman, it pleases me to know that the administration has asked for the billion dollars in the NGREA accounts. You usually have to rely on the Pentagon to make that request and fund it. And there was one year, it wasn't very long ago, if you remember one year, they wiped out the entire NGREA account for another purpose. So this NGREA account is, while only a billion dollars, and I say only a billon, like that's not a significant, you know, it is a significant amount of money, but over time we haven't been able to keep up with inflation, and so that's reducing really the actual purchase power, if your will, of that particular account. But how important it is is NGREA to the overall service.
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Congressman, you've heard from everyone on this table that NGREA is the lifeblood of our modernization so that we can be interoperable when we get called to go do Epic Fury or any other mission sets. And we do it innovatively. Our Air National Guard Air Force Reserve Test Center really gets 80% of the capabilities at 20% of the cost. So every dollar that goes into NGREA is really a huge force multiplier for the National Guard and the Reserve component to be interoperable with our services.
Mr. Womack: I would like for that account to be somewhat indexed, if you will, in its request for inflationary pressures. That, to me, would be very important. Last question, Combat Training Center rotations. We talked about this yesterday with the Army, with Secretary Driscoll and General Laniv. And I know one of our Arkansas units has taken a spot, volunteered to take a spot in a CTC rotation. General Nordhaus, can you share how important these CTC rotations are in building foundational readiness and help the Guard be that operational force that we so desperately need?
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Congressman, yes, last year I went to Fort Polk for JRTC and out to Fort Irwin for NTC. This is where our units are getting that complex training environment across the board to be able to pull that all together. And so each one of these rotations are critical to National Guard's readiness for mission sets that we might get asked to do or part of a GIFMAP rotation, a global force management rotation in the future and so it gets our units ready to go so that they can go forward, so they're critical to our readiness.
Mr. Womack: Yeah, and Arkansas is our Brigade, our Infantry Brigade is one of the units that's going to transition from the infantry structure to the mobile structure, a little less for structure. But even with that, I think the CTC rotations are quite important. I have other questions. I'll ask for the record. Did you want to respond to that?
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Congressman, if I can just add one piece. One other thing that we do at NTCs and JRTCs is we bring our State Partnership partners with us. And so both of those, the units that were forward deployed had their state partners with them. That's 60% of the globe are partnered with a National Guard state, territory or the District of Columbia. And thank you to Congress for the additional funds for that State Partnership Program.
Mr. Womack: Great point. Remember we talked about that SPP being a two-way street helps them helps us. There's mutual benefit to it. I yield back.
Mr. Joyce: Thank you. General Nordhaus, in your written testimony, you made note that over 400 Guard cyber professionals were activated in 2025 to respond to network intrusions against state and local governments. You described the Guard as a cornerstone of a whole of the state cybersecurity strategy. Can you discuss how that cybersecurity collaboration works on the ground and what investments Congress can make to help strengthen those partnerships in FY27?
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Thanks Congressman. You know, right now I talked about in Minnesota with Winona County, their emergency management system was taken over and they pushed the Guard 16 or 15 Soldiers out there and what might take months sounds like talking with the Adjutant General it's going to take weeks, it's gonna take a little bit of time, but they're on it. The National Guard has, you know, on the Air National Guard 16 cyber protection teams, 11 on the Army National Guard side. And so those cyber professionals, because they're Guardsmen, right, they work out an industry. They bring those civilian skill sets in. They're the pros out there that are working for industry. And then they come in and with the tool sets that department gives them, now you have this incredible capability there. So our Guardsmen need to have the same authorities as we go across and think about that from state active duty to Title 32 authorities and then to Title 10 so that however they're used and whatever authority that they can best help the community, secure and respond within the homeland for critical infrastructure, but can also do homeland defense as cyber protection teams.
Mr. Joyce: I can't agree with you more. We need to get more involved and that's one area that unfortunate with CISA we continue to cut or not provide the information and when I brought assisted to my district and had a hearing I was amazed amount of schools and hospitals and other areas that have been attacked already and we're not doing much to help or provide that effort at a local level.
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Yes, Congressman, and I'm going to brag on the Guard members. This is not about me. It's about our Guard member. But five out of the last six championships have been won by these National Guard teams because they have these skill sets and they go back and forth across on that. And we have a huge exercise Cyber Shield coming up with, I believe, I can't remember the exact number, but I think it's 22 states and then they're also bringing in their state partners across the board from 16 or 17 nations. So we're not only helping within the U.S., but now also taking that partnership capacity and cyber out to our partner nations.
Mr. Womack: That's something to brag about. Quickly though, I don't have much time left. What can we do for you to help enhance those efforts?
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: I talked about authorities, so just making sure that the Guard has the authorities needed to be able to, if a governor needs them to come out and be able to be on equipment and help the state, that they have those authorities to be able to execute it in the tool sets. And then from that standpoint, also making sure that we have funding in the budget to grow cyber.
Mr. Calvert: Thank you. Just a couple of comments, and I'll ask Ms. McCollum to make comments before we conclude. Mr. Ellsey mentioned, and it's true, that we have a fighter problem. Obviously, the F-18 line is shutting down. Probably shouldn't have done that, but we did. The F-16s are old that you have. The F15s you have are old. Probably a question both for Mr. Nordhaus and for Mr. Healy General Healy, how critical is it that we get these fighter production numbers up in order to make sure that you have adequate aircraft to fly the mission that we count on in the future? I'll start with you, General.
Gen. Steve Nordhaus: Chairman, I'd just take a look at the aerospace control alert mission set that's done. Ninety-four percent are the fighters across the United States are covered by Air National Guard units. Many of those are flying older F-16 aircraft, and so they need to be modernized as we get into the future. They have strong capabilities now, but as we to the future and new threats, we have to make sure that we recapitalize our fighters.