Congress·In Committee·H.R. 6976

Duty Status Reform Act

House Panel Reviews Duty Status Reform Act to Streamline Reserve and National Guard Call-Up Rules

Jan 8·View on Congress.gov·Read full text

Part of: Congress Moves to Streamline National Guard Duty and Personnel Rules

StalledNext up: A house committeeNo action in 6 months

The Duty Status Reform Act is currently stalled in the House of Representatives. It was sent to several committees in January 2026, but no action has been taken on the bill since then. It must be reviewed by these committees before it can move forward, but most bills like this never receive a vote.

Legislative Progress

House

No action since January 2026

Senate

President

Law

Key Points

Would reorganize how Congress lets the military put Reserve and National Guard members on different kinds of duty, aiming for clearer rules and fewer overlapping authorities.
Creates four duty “categories,” including a new option for remote assignments that can be done on a flexible schedule and location, as long as the work is pre-approved.
Sets clearer limits for certain call-ups without a service member’s consent, including caps and time limits tied to the type of emergency and mission.
Expands and clarifies when the President can call the National Guard into federal service for domestic crises and when disaster help can use Reserve forces at a governor’s request.
Tries to better line up pay and benefits with the type of duty being performed, so service members and families aren’t surprised by what they do or don’t qualify for.

National SecurityVeteransInfrastructureCybersecurity

Impact Analysis

Personal Impact

How this policy affects specific groups of people

Mixed Impacts(3)

Military Active

Neutral

Child Tax Credit

Neutral

Small Business Owner

Neutral

Positive Impacts(6)

Federal Employee

Helps

Chronic Illness

Helps

Veterans Benefits

Helps

Retiree

Helps

Student Loans

Helps

Student

Helps

State Impacts

District of ColumbiaDC

Mixed

The bill repeatedly treats the District of Columbia like a “State” for National Guard call-up and duty rules and specifically references the commanding general of the DC National Guard. Practically, DC could see clearer legal pathways for DC Guard duty status and benefits alignment when DC Guard members are ordered to certain duties.

Puerto RicoPR

Mixed

Puerto Rico is explicitly included in multiple places (treated like a “State” for certain Guard authorities) and is listed as a location where National Guard duty/training rules apply. This could matter for Puerto Rico Guard members’ duty status labels and whether certain benefits and protections attach to their orders under the updated system.

GuamGU

Mixed

Guam is explicitly included in the bill’s definitions and location rules for National Guard duty and certain call-up authorities. For Guam Guard members, the practical effect is that the bill’s relabeled duty categories and benefit alignment would apply the same way they do in states, reducing special-case treatment.

Virgin IslandsVI

Mixed

The U.S. Virgin Islands are named in the bill’s definitions and location rules for National Guard duty and certain call-up authorities. This would apply the same reorganized duty categories and aligned benefits framework to Guard members from the Virgin Islands.

HawaiiHI

Mixed

The bill includes a specific education-related rule for National Guard members serving on full-time National Guard duty in Hawaii (and Alaska or Puerto Rico) when they were ordered from a different place. That could affect eligibility for certain Department of Defense dependent education benefits in those cross-location situations.

AlaskaAK

Mixed

The bill includes a specific education-related rule for National Guard members serving on full-time National Guard duty in Alaska (and Hawaii or Puerto Rico) when they were ordered from a different place. This can matter for dependent education benefit eligibility for families in these cross-location duty situations.