Presidentially-appointed Army leaders told the House Armed Services Committee on June 4 that the Army Transformation Initiative (ATI) will remake how the service buys, fields and sustains equipment and how it organizes headquarters and formations.

Why it matters: ATI aims to shift funding and authorities so the Army can buy and update capabilities more rapidly, reclaim “right to repair” access to equipment parts, and return staff from headquarters to formations — changes that could alter industrial demand, training and prepositioned stocks.

“Committee will come to order…we still have not received any real information about that budget request, nor have we received any detailed information on the army’s transformation initiative or ATI,” Chairman Mike Rogers told witnesses at the start of the hearing, pressing leaders for a blueprint and timeline.

Secretary of the Army Dan Driscoll described ATI as four broad “buckets” of action: stop buying systems the Army does not want; buy modern, commercial and modular capabilities (drones, counter‑UAS, data layers); expand the Army’s right to repair and depot modernization; and push personnel from headquarters back into operational formations. “The Army Transformation Initiative will make us into an army that is lean, agile, and relentlessly focused on empowering its soldiers,” Driscoll said.

Gen. Randy George, the Army chief of staff, said ATI already includes steps taken under FY24 funding—so‑called “transformation in contact” experiments—and enumerated specific implementation choices: canceling programs judged obsolete, consolidating or cutting headquarters, and buying modular systems that can be updated rapidly. “We will cancel programs that are obsolete or not what our war fighters need,” George said. He told the committee the Army will cut some headquarters positions — for example, “we're gonna reduce geo structure, cut 1,000 positions from the headquarters department of the Army staff” — and reassign people to field units.

A central operational request to Congress: both leaders asked for “agile funding” authorities to buy evolving technologies such as small drones, counter‑UAS, electronic warfare and autonomy without being locked into traditional multiyear program‑of‑record processes. Driscoll said many capabilities now exist in the commercial sector and the Army needs the flexibility to “buy capabilities rather than specific programs” so warfighters can receive the best available hardware and software faster.

Acquisition and oversight: Committee members, including the chairman and the ranking member, said they support rapid reform but insisted on oversight. Rogers and Ranking Member Adam Smith said Congress must see the Army’s assessments, cost analyses and a timeline before committing appropriations. Driscoll responded that the service will share reasonable drafts as they mature and asked the committee to “empower us to make these changes while providing your constitutionally mandated oversight.”

Right to repair and depots: Driscoll recounted examples in which equipment sat idle because the Army could not legally or contractually fix or 3‑D‑print low‑cost parts. He and George asked Congress to help statutory and contracting changes so depots and units can maintain and rapidly return equipment to service.

Force‑structure and international posture: Leaders told the panel ATI aims to build formations more relevant to near‑peer competition, particularly in the Indo‑Pacific, while not losing sight of NATO commitments in Europe. Several members pressed that ATI must not hollow out forces needed for deterrence in Europe.

Unresolved details and staff work: While leaders said several programs would be divested or accelerated and that the President’s FY26 request will reflect some of that, they repeatedly acknowledged the initiative is iterative. Driscoll said there will be multiple ATI iterations and that “there will be no 1 date where everything with our first batch of ATI will be completed.” The committee asked for a detailed implementation blueprint and explicit timelines; leaders committed to follow‑up briefings.

What’s next: The committee signaled it will make acquisition reform a priority in this year’s NDAA, and Driscoll asked for statutory authorities that would enable the procurement, data rights and funding flexibility ATI requires.

Ending: The witnesses framed ATI as an urgent, multi‑year reorientation. Committee members expressed conditional support but pressed repeatedly for more complete written plans, cost data and timelines before voting statutory changes or additional discretionary authorities.