[Senate Report 117-39]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 129
117th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 117-39
_______________________________________________________________________
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022
R E P O R T
[TO ACCOMPANY S. 2792]
ON
TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022 FOR MILITARY
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND
FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE
MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
----------
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
September 22 (legislative day, September 21), 2021.--Ordered to be
printed
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022
Calendar No. 129
117th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 117-39
_______________________________________________________________________
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022
R E P O R T
[TO ACCOMPANY S. 2792]
ON
TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022 FOR MILITARY
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND
FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE
MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
__________
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
September 22 (legislative day, September 21), 2021.--Ordered to be
printed
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
45-585 WASHINGTON : 2021
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
JACK REED, Rhode Island, Chairman
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma
KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii TOM COTTON, Arkansas
TIM KAINE, Virginia MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota
ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine JONI ERNST, Iowa
ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts THOM TILLIS, North Carolina
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois RICK SCOTT, Florida
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
MARK KELLY, Arizona JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama
Elizabeth L. King, Staff Director
John A. Bonsell, Minority Staff Director
(II)
C O N T E N T S
----------
REPORT TO ACCOMPANY S. 2792
Purpose of the Bill.............................................. 1
Committee Overview............................................... 2
Budgetary Effects of This Act (Sec. 4)........................... 3
Summary of Discretionary Authorizations and Budget Authority
Implication.................................................... 3
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS................. 5
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT............................................. 5
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 5
Authorization of appropriations (sec. 101)............... 5
Subtitle B--Army Programs.................................... 5
Multiyear procurement authority for AH-64E Apache
helicopters (sec. 121)................................. 5
Multiyear procurement authority for UH-60M and HH-60M
Black Hawk helicopters (sec. 122)...................... 5
Report and limitations on acquisition of Integrated
Visual Augmentation System (sec. 123).................. 6
Modification of deployment by the Army of interim cruise
missile defense capability (sec. 124).................. 6
Subtitle C--Navy Programs.................................... 6
Extension of prohibition on availability of funds for
Navy port waterborne security barriers (sec. 131)...... 6
Analysis of certain radar investment options (sec. 132).. 7
Extension of report on Littoral Combat Ship mission
packages (sec. 133).................................... 7
Extension of procurement authorities for certain
amphibious shipbuilding programs (sec. 134)............ 7
Limitation on decommissioning or inactivating a battle
force ship before the end of expected service life
(sec. 135)............................................. 7
Acquisition, modernization, and sustainment plan for
carrier air wings (sec. 136)........................... 8
Improving oversight of Navy contracts for shipbuilding,
conversion, and repair (sec. 137)...................... 8
Subtitle D--Air Force Programs............................... 8
Required minimum inventory of tactical airlift aircraft
(sec. 141)............................................. 8
Extension of inventory requirement for Air Force fighter
aircraft (sec. 142).................................... 9
Prohibition on use of funds for retirement of A-10
aircraft (sec. 143).................................... 9
Requirements relating to reports on fighter aircraft
(sec. 144)............................................. 9
Prohibition on additional F-35 aircraft for the Air
National Guard (sec. 145).............................. 10
Prohibition on availability of funds for reducing the
number of KC-135 aircraft of the Air National Guard
designated as primary mission aircraft inventory (sec.
146)................................................... 10
Authority to divest 18 KC-135 aircraft (sec. 147)........ 10
Prohibition on use of funds for a follow-on tanker
aircraft to the KC-46 aircraft (sec. 148).............. 10
Maintenance of B-1 bomber aircraft squadrons (sec. 149).. 10
Subtitle E--Defense-Wide, Joint, and Multiservice Matters.... 10
Prohibition on duplication of efforts to provide air- and
space-based ground moving target indicator capability
(sec. 161)............................................. 10
Limitation on funds for Armed Overwatch aircraft (sec.
162)................................................... 11
Transition of F-35 program sustainment from Joint Program
Office to Air Force and Navy (sec. 163)................ 11
Budget Items................................................. 11
Army..................................................... 11
Army unfunded requirements........................... 11
CH-47 Cargo Aircraft modifications................... 12
Paladin Integrated Management........................ 12
Multi-Domain Task Force All-Domain Operations Center
cloud pilot........................................ 12
Integrated Visual Augmentation System................ 12
Man-portable radiation detection systems............. 13
Expeditionary Solid Waste Disposal System............ 13
Infantry Squad Vehicle............................... 13
Navy..................................................... 13
Navy and Marine Corps unfunded requirements.......... 13
CH-53K............................................... 14
MQ-4 Triton.......................................... 14
Submarine industrial base development................ 15
Arleigh Burke-class destroyers....................... 15
Arleigh Burke-class advance procurement.............. 15
Surface combatant supplier development............... 16
LPD Flight II advance procurement.................... 16
LHA replacement...................................... 16
Expeditionary fast transport vessels................. 16
Used sealift ships................................... 16
Sonobuoys............................................ 17
Ground-launched anti-ship missiles................... 17
Ground-launched long range fires..................... 17
Air Force................................................ 17
Air Force and Space Force unfunded requirements...... 17
F-35 power modules................................... 17
F-35A................................................ 18
MH-139A.............................................. 18
MQ-9................................................. 18
B-52 training system................................. 19
F-35 modifications................................... 19
F-16 AESA radars..................................... 19
Intercontinental Ballistic Missile fuze realignment
of funds........................................... 19
Long Duration Propulsive National Security Space
Launch Secondary Payload Adapter Demonstration..... 19
Radio equipment...................................... 20
Defense Wide............................................. 20
Defense-wide Procurement unfunded requirements....... 20
Combat diving advanced equipment acceleration........ 20
Modernized forward-look sonar........................ 20
Fused panoramic night vision goggles acceleration.... 21
Items of Special Interest................................
Constellation-class frigate program.................. 21
San Antonio-class lethality and survivability
upgrades........................................... 21
``Digital Engineering'' capabilities................. 22
Additional applications of unmanned technology....... 22
Air Force airborne electronic attack systems......... 23
Airborne advanced training........................... 23
Amphibious ship acquisition strategy................. 24
Army National Guard Airborne Tactical Extraction
Platform........................................... 25
Army National Guard capabilities..................... 25
Assessment of Armored Brigade Combat Team
modernization...................................... 25
Assessment on Air National Guard F-16 self-protection
capabilities....................................... 26
Auxiliary power units for Army ground vehicles....... 26
Aviation defense equipment report.................... 27
Brief on mixed-oxidant electrolytic disinfectant
generator water purification....................... 27
Briefing on munitions procurement, stockage and
industrial base.................................... 27
CH-47F Block II funding restoration.................. 28
DDG(X) acquisition strategy.......................... 28
DDG-51 destroyer multi-year procurement.............. 29
Development of land-based long-range hypersonic
weapons............................................ 29
Extended Range Cannon Artillery acquisition report... 30
Improved Turbine Engine Program...................... 30
Joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar System
modifications...................................... 30
Long range strike.................................... 31
Machine gun capability gap study..................... 31
Mobile Protected Firepower........................... 32
Modernizing Army short-range air defense capabilities 32
Multi-spectral sensor detection mitigation for body
armor and individual equipment..................... 33
Paladin Integrated Management acquisition strategy... 33
RC-135 Rivet Joint................................... 34
Report on Agile Combat Employment.................... 34
Report on cryptographic modernization and resiliency
of communications systems.......................... 35
Report on enhanced night vision and visual
augmentation devices............................... 35
Report on excess military equipment.................. 36
Report on personnel parachute and cargo management
inventory acquisition decisions.................... 36
Report on training of military pilots................ 37
Soldier Enhancement Program.......................... 37
Soldier load management strategy update.............. 37
Tactical and combat vehicle electrification.......... 38
U.S. Southern Command requirements................... 39
Warm Isostatic Press for manufacture of body armor... 39
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION............ 41
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 41
Authorization of appropriations (sec. 201)............... 41
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and
Limitations................................................ 41
Increase in allowable rate of basic pay for certain
employees of Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
(sec. 211)............................................. 41
Additional mission areas for mechanisms for expedited
access to technical talent and expertise at academic
institutions by Department of Defense (sec. 212)....... 41
Modification of other transaction authority for research
projects (sec. 213).................................... 41
Artificial intelligence metrics (sec. 214)............... 42
Modification of the Joint Common Foundation Program (sec.
215)................................................... 42
Executive education on emerging technologies for senior
civilian and military leaders (sec. 216)............... 43
Improvements relating to national network for
microelectronics research and development (sec. 217)... 44
Activities to accelerate domestic quantum computing
capabilities (sec. 218)................................ 44
Pilot programs for passive telecommunications
infrastructure to facilitate installation 5G deployment
(sec. 219)............................................. 45
National Guard participation in microreactor testing and
evaluation (sec. 220).................................. 45
Limitation on transfer of certain operational flight test
events and reduction in operational flight test
capacity (sec. 221).................................... 45
Limitation on availability of funds for the High Accuracy
Detection and Exploitation System (sec. 222)........... 45
Subtitle C--Codification and Technical Corrections........... 46
Codification of direct hire authority at personnel
demonstration laboratories for advanced degree holders
(sec. 231)............................................. 46
Codification of authorities relating to Department of
Defense science and technology reinvention laboratories
(sec. 232)............................................. 46
Codification of requirement for Defense Established
Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (sec. 233)... 47
Technical correction to pilot program for enhancement of
research, development, test, and evaluation centers of
Department of Defense (sec. 234)....................... 47
Subtitle D--Plans, Reports, and Other Matters................ 47
Study on efficient use of Department of Defense test and
evaluation organizations, facilities, and laboratories
(sec. 241)............................................. 47
Analysis of potential modifications to Department of
Defense unmanned aerial systems categorization (sec.
242)................................................... 47
Digital development infrastructure plan and working group
(sec. 243)............................................. 48
Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle requirements analysis
(sec. 244)............................................. 48
Making permanent requirement for annual report by
Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (sec. 245). 49
Budget Items................................................. 49
Army..................................................... 49
Smart thread data exchange........................... 49
Unmanned aircraft systems propulsion research........ 49
University research programs......................... 50
Ceramic material systems for extreme environments.... 50
Earthen structures research.......................... 50
Graphene applications for military engineering....... 50
Polar research and testing........................... 51
Verified inherent control............................ 51
Light detection and ranging technology............... 51
Unmanned aerial systems sensor research.............. 52
Counter-unmanned aerial systems applied research..... 52
High energy laser research........................... 52
High energy laser support technology................. 52
Kill chain automation for air and missile defense
systems............................................ 53
Secure computing capabilities........................ 53
Military footwear research........................... 53
Pathfinder air assault technologies.................. 53
Additive manufacturing capabilities for austere
operating environments............................. 54
Permafrost research.................................. 54
High Performance Computing Modernization Program..... 54
Combat vehicle lithium battery development........... 55
Cyber and connected vehicle integration research..... 55
Robotics development................................. 55
Command post modernization........................... 55
Network technology research.......................... 55
Advanced guidance technology......................... 56
Future Long Range Assault Aircraft................... 56
Future vertical lift 20mm chain gun.................. 56
Army unfunded requirements........................... 56
Development of anthropomorphic armor for female
servicemembers..................................... 56
Synthetic Training Environment....................... 57
Electric Light Reconnaissance Vehicle................ 57
Active Protection Systems for Bradley and Stryker.... 57
Cyber situational understanding...................... 57
Contract writing systems reduction................... 58
CH-47 Chinook Cargo On/Off Loading System............ 58
Chinook T55-714C engine certification and integration 59
Apache Future Development............................ 59
Abrams tank modernization............................ 59
Identity, credentialing and access management
reduction--Army.................................... 59
Navy..................................................... 59
High-performance computation and data equipment...... 59
University research programs......................... 60
Graphene electro-active metamaterials................ 60
Relative positioning of autonomous platforms......... 60
Resilient innovative sustainable economies via
university partnerships............................ 61
Anti-corrosion nanotechnologies...................... 61
Humanoid robotics research........................... 61
Undersea vehicle research academic partnerships...... 62
Undersea warfare applied research.................... 62
Navy and Marine Corps unfunded requirements.......... 62
Unmanned systems interoperability.................... 62
Naval prototypes..................................... 62
Manned-Unmanned Experimentation...................... 63
Stratospheric balloon research....................... 63
Advanced Sensors Application Program................. 63
Contract writing systems reduction................... 64
Strategic Weapon System Shipboard Navigation System
Modernization...................................... 64
Neural network algorithms on advanced processors..... 64
Air Force................................................ 64
University research programs......................... 64
Continuous composites 3D printing.................... 65
High energy synchrotron X-ray research............... 65
Ground test and development of hypersonic engines.... 65
Hypersonic flight test services...................... 66
Low-cost small turbine engine research............... 66
Skyborg.............................................. 66
Air Force integrated technology demonstrations....... 66
Unmanned Adversary Air............................... 67
B-52 engine pylon fairings increase.................. 67
Hypersonics materials manufacturing.................. 67
Sustainment and modernization research and
development program................................ 68
Advanced engine development.......................... 68
Tactical Datalink Waveform........................... 68
Automatic target recognition......................... 69
Academic technology transfer partnerships............ 69
Air Force operational energy increases............... 69
Cold spray technologies.............................. 70
Coordination with private sector to protect against
foreign malicious cyber actors..................... 70
Contract writing systems reduction................... 70
Air Force combat training ranges..................... 70
Degraded GPS Live Flight Training.................... 71
Gulf Test Range enhancements......................... 71
Future tanker reduction.............................. 71
U.S. Strategic Command Nuclear Command, Control and
Communication Enterprise Center.................... 71
F-35 continuous capability development and delivery.. 72
Foreign material acquisition and exploitation........ 72
Over The Horizon Radar............................... 72
Polar Over the Horizon Radar......................... 72
Additive manufacturing............................... 72
Identity, credentialing, and access management
reduction--Air Force............................... 73
Weather forecasting using machine learning........... 73
Battery cycle life improvements...................... 73
Radiation hardened microelectronics.................. 73
Air Force and Space Force unfunded requirements...... 73
Joint Space Rapid Experimentation and Demonstration.. 74
Maui Optical Site.................................... 74
Tactically Responsive Launch......................... 74
Digital core services for distributed space test and
training........................................... 74
Microelectronics research network.................... 75
Defense Wide............................................. 75
Defense research sciences............................ 75
Defense Established Program to Stimulate Competitive
Research........................................... 75
Minerva management and social science research....... 75
Traumatic brain injury research...................... 76
Workforce development for defense laboratories....... 76
Quantum computing acceleration....................... 76
High speed flight experiment testing................. 77
Certification-based workforce training programs for
manufacturing...................................... 77
Cybersecurity for industrial control systems......... 77
Data analytics and visual system..................... 78
Integrated silicon-based lasers...................... 78
High performance computing-enabled large-scale
advanced manufacturing............................. 78
Steel performance initiative......................... 78
Artificial intelligence research activities.......... 79
Deep water active technologies....................... 79
Sensor technology.................................... 79
Survivability Planning and Intercept Evaluation Tool. 79
Strategic capabilities research and prototyping...... 80
Increasing manufacturing readiness level for
thermionic energy harvesting technology............ 80
Joint affordable kill chain closure program.......... 80
Homeland Defense Radar--Hawaii....................... 81
Joint All-Domain Command and Control experimentation. 81
Laser communication ground terminals................. 81
Space laser communications........................... 81
Wave glider development.............................. 82
Systems engineering.................................. 82
Technical information services....................... 82
Rare earth element separation technologies........... 83
Demonstration program on domestic production of rare
earth elements from coal byproducts................ 83
Digital manufacturing................................ 84
Industrial skills training........................... 84
Defense industrial skills and technology training
systems............................................ 84
Submarine construction workforce training pipeline... 84
Workforce transformation cyber initiative pilot
program............................................ 85
Maritime scalable effects acceleration............... 85
Information Systems Security Program................. 85
Rapid Innovation Program............................. 85
Joint test and evaluation............................ 86
Acquisition Innovation Research Center............... 86
Domestic Comparative Testing Program................. 86
Artificial intelligence applied research activities.. 86
Pilot program on public-private partnerships with
internet ecosystem companies to detect and disrupt
adversary cyber operations......................... 87
Biomedical technologies.............................. 87
Information & communications technology.............. 87
Materials & biological technology.................... 87
Electronics technology............................... 87
Advanced electronics technology...................... 87
Command, control, and communications systems......... 88
Funding support for National Security Agency Defense. 88
Industrial Base cybersecurity activities............. 88
Fifth Generation Wireless Network Technology......... 88
Defense-wide Research and Development unfunded
requirements....................................... 89
Items of Special Interest................................ 89
Advanced engine development.......................... 89
Anti-malarial preventative measures.................. 90
Autonomously powered exoskeletons.................... 90
Bomber long-term roadmap............................. 90
Comptroller General assessment of operational
security standards for microelectronics products
and services....................................... 91
Comptroller General review of the Department of
Defense's directed energy development efforts...... 92
Employing ground-based systems at sea................ 92
Facial recognition and surveillance technologies..... 92
Foreign military aviation training capacity.......... 93
Graphitic composites and foam for Next Generation
Combat Vehicle..................................... 93
Graphitic composites and foam for special operations
forces communications and intelligence support
systems............................................ 93
High energy laser research........................... 94
High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles rollover
mitigation......................................... 94
Hypersonic research.................................. 94
Hypersonics test facilities.......................... 95
Joint All-Domain Testing and Training................ 95
Jointless hull development........................... 96
KC-10 Divestiture.................................... 96
KC-46 basing......................................... 96
Mobile compact high energy laser..................... 97
MQ-9 Resiliency...................................... 97
Networked integrated controls kit and electronics
link in support of Next Generation Combat Vehicle
advanced technology................................ 97
Policies to support use of additive manufacturing
capabilities....................................... 97
Radar and multi-function sensor capabilities......... 98
Report on special access program administration...... 98
Study of injuries during aircraft ejections.......... 98
Support by manufacturing institutes for modernization
priorities......................................... 99
Support Naval Power and Energy Systems Technology
Development Roadmap................................ 99
Wide-area motion imagery development................. 99
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE............................. 101
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 101
Authorization of appropriations (sec. 301)............... 101
Subtitle B--Energy and Environment...........................
Expansion of purposes of Sentinel Landscapes Partnership
program to include resilience (sec. 311)............... 101
Maintenance of current analytical tools in evaluating
energy resilience measures (sec. 312).................. 101
Military Aviation and Installation Assurance
Clearinghouse matters (sec. 313)....................... 101
Exemption from prohibition on use of open-air burn pits
in contingency operations outside the United States
(sec. 314)............................................. 102
Demonstration program on domestic production of rare
earth elements from coal byproducts (sec. 315)......... 102
Authority to transfer amounts derived from energy cost
savings (sec. 316)..................................... 103
Sense of Senate on energy independence and
diversification (sec. 317)............................. 103
Subtitle C--National Security Climate Resilience............. 103
National Security Climate Resilience (secs. 331-335)..... 103
Subtitle D--Treatment of Perfluoroalkyl Substances and
Polyfluoroalkyl Substances................................. 104
Treatment by Department of Defense of perfluoroalkyl
substances and polyfluoroalkyl substances (sec. 351)... 104
Public disclosure of testing and results of Department of
Defense testing for perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl
substances and additional requirements for testing
(sec. 352)............................................. 104
Extension of transfer authority for funding of study and
assessment on health implications of per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances contamination in drinking
water by Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry (sec. 353).................................... 104
Report on remediation of perfluoroalkyl substances and
polyfluoroalkyl substances at certain military
installations (sec. 354)............................... 104
Report on schedule for completion of remediation of
perfluoroalkyl substances and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (sec. 355).................................. 104
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 105
Extension of temporary authority to extend contracts and
leases under the ARMS Initiative (sec. 371)............ 105
Incident reporting requirements for Department of Defense
regarding lost or stolen weapons (sec. 372)............ 105
Repeal of sunset for naval vessel examination report
(sec. 373)............................................. 105
Report on ammunition organic industrial base
modernization by Department of the Army (sec. 374)..... 105
Annual report by Secretary of the Navy on ship
maintenance (sec. 375)................................. 105
Budget Items................................................. 106
Unfunded requirements.................................... 106
Critical organic industrial base production capacity..... 106
Facilities Sustainment, Restoration and Modernization.... 106
U.S. Africa Command intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance......................................... 107
Training Improvements for Counter-small Unmanned Aerial
Systems................................................ 107
Army real estate inventory system........................ 107
United States Southern Command traditional intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance....................... 107
Army National Guard Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil
Support Teams Equipment Sustainment.................... 108
Identity, credentialing, and access management
reduction--Navy........................................ 108
Additional intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance
for United States Central Command...................... 108
A-10 force structure..................................... 108
C-130 force structure.................................... 109
Office of Security Cooperation--Iraq reduction........... 109
United States Space Command pathway to full operational
capability............................................. 109
Joint Exercise Program................................... 109
Modernized forward-look sonar............................ 110
Personal signature management acceleration............... 110
Innovative Readiness Training increase................... 110
STARBASE................................................. 111
Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency analytic
tools for assessing FOCI............................... 111
Troops-to-Teachers Program............................... 111
milCloud 2.0 migration................................... 111
Cybersecurity automation and orchestration for Joint
Force Headquarters, Department of Defense Information
Network................................................ 112
Hardening of Department of Defense Information Network
and security validation demonstration.................. 112
U.S. Africa Command international security cooperation
programs............................................... 112
Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative................... 113
Joint Combined Exchange Training......................... 113
State Partnership Program................................ 113
Impact Aid............................................... 113
Analytical tools in evaluating energy resilience measures 114
Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup.................................. 114
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Nation-wide
human health assessment................................ 114
Congressional Hearings and Reporting Requirements
Tracking System Modernization.......................... 114
Cost Assessment Data Enterprise.......................... 115
Defense Environmental International Cooperation program
increase............................................... 115
Occupational license portability for military spouses
through interstate compacts............................ 116
Office of the Secretary of Defense civilian workforce.... 116
Personnel in the Office of Assistant Secretary of Defense
Sustainment and Environment, Safety, and Occupational
Health................................................. 116
Secretary of Defense Strategic Competition Initiative.... 117
United States Special Operations Command management and
headquarters........................................... 117
Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid........... 117
Bulk fuel adjustment..................................... 117
Foreign currency fluctuations............................ 118
Printing costs reduction................................. 118
Unobligated balances..................................... 118
Items of Special Interest.................................... 118
Aberdeen Proving Ground.................................. 118
Advanced human performance based small arms training..... 119
Advanced materials processing briefing................... 120
Agent Orange briefing.................................... 120
Air Force range prioritization and modernization......... 120
Alternatively powered vehicles........................... 121
Army organic industrial base modernization............... 122
Army Pre-Positioned Stock readiness...................... 123
Augmented reality training to support aviation operations 123
Autonomous robotic targets for small arms training ranges 123
Briefing on reducing life cycle costs.................... 124
Center for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances........... 124
Cooperative agreements for shared use of airspace near
United States southern border.......................... 125
Cost Assessment Data Enterprise.......................... 125
Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency
industrial security report............................. 125
Demining the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's firing
ranges in Afghanistan.................................. 126
Distributed energy projects briefing..................... 127
Encouraging the Army's integration of synthetic and live
training............................................... 127
Energy savings performance contracts..................... 128
Equipment procurement parity for operational reserves.... 128
Expansion of the ship depot maintenance pilot program.... 128
Ground Test Asset Board.................................. 129
High pressure advanced rapid deposition technology....... 130
Knee and elbow protection................................ 130
Large-capacity batteries................................. 131
Military installation resilience training................ 131
Military munitions program construction support.......... 132
Optimizing private sector fast attack submarine
maintenance............................................ 132
Pilot program to extract natural gas to develop energy
security and resilience................................ 133
Propulsion readiness..................................... 133
Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative........ 134
Recycling rare earth materials........................... 134
Report on competitiveness in the defense industrial base. 134
Review to reduce reporting requirements.................. 135
Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Plan implementation. 135
Staffing and resources................................... 137
Study for enhancing ship readiness through digital
techniques............................................. 137
Study of expanding ship repair capacity.................. 138
Survivable Airborne Operations Center.................... 138
Sustainable technology evaluation and demonstration...... 139
Sustainment of Army health and holistic fitness system
equipment.............................................. 139
U.S. Special Operations Command Preservation of the Force
and Families Program................................... 140
Underwater cut and capture............................... 141
Universal Robotic Controller project..................... 141
Utilities Privatization.................................. 141
Vieques cleanup.......................................... 142
Water resource management................................ 142
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS...................... 145
Subtitle A--Active Forces.................................... 145
End strengths for active forces (sec. 401)............... 145
Authority with respect to authorized strengths for
general and flag officers within the Armed Forces for
emerging requirements (sec. 402)....................... 145
Additional authority to vary Space Force end strength
(sec. 403)............................................. 145
Temporary exemption from end strength grade restrictions
for the Space Force (sec. 404)......................... 145
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces................................... 146
End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411)............ 146
End strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of
the reserves (sec. 412)................................ 146
End strengths for military technicians (dual status)
(sec. 413)............................................. 146
Maximum number of reserve personnel authorized to be on
active duty for operational support (sec. 414)......... 147
Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 147
Military personnel (sec. 421)............................ 147
Budget Items................................................. 147
Military personnel funding changes....................... 147
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY............................... 149
Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy......................... 149
Increase in authorized lieutenant commander billets in
the Navy (sec. 501).................................... 149
Time in grade requirements (sec. 502).................... 149
Subtitle B--General Service Authorities and Correction of
Military Records........................................... 149
Part I--Selective Service Reform......................... 149
Modernization of the Selective Service System (sec.
511)............................................... 149
Report on exemptions and deferments for a possible
military draft (sec. 512).......................... 149
Report on processes and procedures for appeal of
denial of status or benefits for failure to
register for Selective Service (sec. 513).......... 149
Responsibilities for national mobilization; personnel
requirements (sec. 514)............................ 150
Enhancements to national mobilization exercises (sec.
515)............................................... 150
Part II--Other Matters................................... 150
Military service independent racial disparity review
(sec. 518)......................................... 150
Appeals to Physical Evaluation Board determinations
of fitness for duty (sec. 519)..................... 150
Extension of paid parental leave (sec. 520).......... 151
Bereavement leave for members of the Armed Forces
(sec. 520A)........................................ 151
Subtitle C--Prevention and Response to Sexual Assault,
Harassment, and Related Misconduct, and Other Military
Justice Matters............................................ 151
DoD Safe Helpline authorization to perform intake of
official restricted and unrestricted reports for
eligible adult sexual assault victims (sec. 521)....... 151
Assessment of relationship between command climate and
the prevention and adjudication of military sexual
misconduct (sec. 522).................................. 151
Policy for ensuring the annual report regarding sexual
assaults involving members of the Armed Forces includes
information on race and ethnicity of victims (sec. 523) 152
Department of Defense tracking of allegations of
retaliation by victims of sexual assault or sexual
harassment and related persons (sec. 524).............. 152
Special Victims Counsel representation of civilian
victims of sex-related offenses (sec. 525)............. 152
Notice to victims of further administrative action
following a determination not to refer to trial by
court-martial (sec. 526)............................... 153
Recommendations on separate punitive article in the
Uniform Code of Military Justice on violent extremism
(sec. 527)............................................. 153
Determination and reporting of missing, absent unknown,
absent without leave, and duty status-whereabouts
unknown service members (sec. 528)..................... 153
Conduct unbecoming an officer (sec. 529)................. 153
Analysis of the use of non-judicial punishment (sec. 530) 153
Sexual Assault Response Coordinator Military Occupational
Specialty (sec. 530A).................................. 154
Implementation of recommendations of the Independent
Review Commission on Sexual Assault in the Military
(sec. 530B)............................................ 154
Subtitle D--Military Justice Reform and Sexual Assault
Prevention................................................. 154
Part I--Military Justice Matters......................... 154
Special victim prosecutors (sec. 531)................ 154
Policies with respect to special victim prosecutors
(sec. 532)......................................... 155
Definition of military magistrate, special victim
offense, and special victim prosecutor (sec. 533).. 155
Clarification of applicability of domestic violence
and stalking to dating partners (sec. 534)......... 155
Clarification relating to who may convene courts-
martial (sec. 535)................................. 155
Inclusion of sexual harassment as general punitive
article (sec. 536)................................. 155
Determinations of impracticability of rehearing (sec.
537)............................................... 155
Plea agreements (sec. 538)........................... 156
Opportunity to obtain witness and other evidence in
trials by court-martial (sec. 539)................. 156
Former jeopardy (sec. 540)........................... 156
Advice to convening authority before referral for
trial (sec. 541)................................... 156
Preliminary hearing (sec. 542)....................... 156
Detail of trial counsel (sec. 543)................... 156
Sentencing reform (sec. 544)......................... 156
Uniform, document-based data system (sec. 545)....... 157
Primary prevention workforce (sec. 546).............. 157
Annual primary prevention research agenda (sec. 547). 157
Full functionality of certain advisory committees and
panels (sec. 548).................................. 157
Military defense counsel parity (sec. 549)........... 157
Resourcing (sec. 550)................................ 157
Applicability to the United States Coast Guard (sec.
551)............................................... 158
Effective date (sec. 552)............................ 158
Part II--Military Justice Improvement and Increasing
Prevention Act......................................... 158
Short title (sec. 561)............................... 158
Improvement of determinations on disposition of
charges for certain offenses under UCMJ with
authorized maximum sentence of confinement of more
than one year (sec. 562)........................... 158
Modification of officers authorized to convene
general and special courts-martial for certain
offenses under UCMJ with authorized maximum
sentence of confinement of more than one year (sec.
563)............................................... 159
Discharge using otherwise authorized personnel and
resources (sec. 564)............................... 159
Monitoring and assessment of modification of
authorities by Defense Advisory Committee on
Investigation, Prosecution, and Defense of Sexual
Assault in the Armed Forces (sec. 565)............. 159
Limitation on modifications to sexual assault
reporting procedures (sec. 566).................... 159
Professionalization of military prosecutors (sec.
567)............................................... 159
Increased training and education on military sexual
assault (sec. 568)................................. 159
Increasing the physical security of military
installations (sec. 569)........................... 159
Effective date and applicability (sec. 570).......... 160
Subtitle E--Member Education, Training, and Transition....... 160
Modification of grant program supporting science,
technology, engineering, and math education in the
Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps to include
quantum information sciences (sec. 571)................ 160
Allocation of authority for nominations to the military
service academies in the event of the death,
resignation, or expulsion from office of a member of
Congress (sec. 572).................................... 160
Troops-to-Teachers Program (sec. 573).................... 160
Combating foreign malign influence (sec. 574)............ 161
Prohibition on implementation by United States Air Force
Academy of civilian faculty tenure system (sec. 575)... 161
Subtitle F--Military Family Readiness and Dependents'
Education..................................................
Certain assistance to local educational agencies that
benefit dependents of military and civilian personnel
(sec. 581)............................................. 161
Pilot program to establish employment fellowship
opportunities for military spouses (sec. 582).......... 162
Subtitle G--Other Matters and Reports........................ 162
Amendments to additional Deputy Inspector General of the
Department of Defense (sec. 591)....................... 162
Inclusion of Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps data
in diversity and inclusion reporting (sec. 592)........ 162
Modified deadline for establishment of special purpose
adjunct to Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery
test (sec. 593)........................................ 162
Reports on Air Force personnel performing duties of a
Nuclear and Missile Operations Officer (13N) (sec. 594) 162
Reports on security force personnel performing protection
level one duties (sec. 595)............................ 163
Items of Special Interest....................................
Active-Duty service obligations for graduates of
cybersecurity courses.................................. 163
Appointment of Chiropractors as Commissioned Officers.... 164
Asian American and Pacific Islander Medal of Honor Review 164
Career Intermission Program.............................. 164
Comptroller General of the United States review of
certain professional development activities of
Department of Defense Education Activity employees..... 165
Comptroller General of the United States review of
Department of Defense payroll system for employees of
the Department of Defense Education Activity........... 165
Comptroller General review of military personnel policies
related to United States Indo-Pacific Command.......... 166
Comptroller General review of Senior Reserve Officers'
Training Corps program contributions to a diverse
officer corps.......................................... 166
Connecting certain servicemembers with community-based
organizations through state veterans agencies.......... 167
Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency briefing on recovery of
servicemembers' remains................................ 167
Department of Defense civilian workforce career
developmental programs................................. 168
Department of Defense implementation of open Government
Accountability Office recommendations concerning sexual
harassment and sexual assault.......................... 168
Education in the Department of Defense................... 169
Establish a Naval Community College...................... 169
Foreign language testing and tracking.................... 169
Increased capacity for servicemember childcare on
military installations................................. 171
Issuance of prisoner-of-war medal........................ 171
Management policies for emerging technology qualified
officers............................................... 172
Military Spouse Employment............................... 172
Notice to servicemembers who separate before completion
of service obligation to transfer GI Bill benefits..... 173
Parental rights at service academies..................... 173
Promotion revision report................................ 174
Public schools on military installations program......... 174
Public-private talent exchanges.......................... 175
Restructure of Army Criminal Investigation Command....... 175
Servicemember workforce development...................... 176
Temporary promotion utilization.......................... 176
Unanimous verdicts for criminal convictions.............. 176
Updates to Fourth Quadrennial Quality of Life review..... 177
Upfront use of DNA to identify remains of servicemembers
missing in action...................................... 177
TITLE VI--MILITARY COMPENSATION.................................. 179
Basic needs allowance for members on active service in the
Armed Forces (sec. 601).................................... 179
Equal incentive pay for members of the reserve components of
the Armed Forces (sec. 602)................................ 179
Extension of expiring travel and transportation authorities
(sec. 603)................................................. 179
Repeal of expiring travel and transportation authorities
(sec. 604)................................................. 179
One-year extension of certain expiring bonus and special pay
authorities (sec. 605)..................................... 179
Requirements in connection with suspension of retired pay and
retirement annuities (sec. 606)............................ 180
Items of Special Interest.................................... 180
Basic allowance for housing.............................. 180
Partial dislocation allowance for members ordered to
vacate housing provided by the United States........... 181
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS................................ 183
Subtitle A--Tricare and Other Health Care Benefits........... 183
Addition of preconception and prenatal carrier screening
coverage as benefits under TRICARE program (sec. 701).. 183
Coverage of overseas subacute and hospice care for
eligible overseas dependents of members of the
uniformed services (sec. 702).......................... 183
Modification of pilot program on receipt of non-generic
prescription maintenance medications under TRICARE
pharmacy benefits program (sec. 703)................... 183
Subtitle B--Health Care Administration....................... 183
Revisions to TRICARE provider networks (sec. 721)........ 183
Implementation of an integrated TRICARE program through
effective market management (sec. 722)................. 184
Establishment of centers of excellence for enhanced
treatment of ocular injuries (sec. 723)................ 184
Mandatory training on health effects of burn pits (sec.
724)................................................... 184
Removal of requirement for one year of participation in
certain medical and lifestyle incentive programs of the
Department of Defense to receive benefits under such
programs (sec. 725).................................... 185
Authority of Secretary of Defense and Secretary of
Veterans Affairs to enter into agreements for planning,
design, and construction of facilities to be operated
as shared medical facilities (sec. 726)................ 185
Consistency in accounting for medical reimbursements
received by military medical treatment facilities from
other Federal agencies (sec. 727)...................... 185
Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters........................ 185
Access by United States Government employees and their
family members to certain facilities of Department of
Defense for assessment and treatment of anomalous
health conditions (sec. 741)........................... 185
Extension of authority for Joint Department of Defense-
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility
Demonstration Fund (sec. 742).......................... 186
Comptroller General study on implementation by Department
of Defense of recent statutory requirements to reform
the military health system (sec. 743).................. 186
Budget Items................................................. 186
Anomalous health incidents............................... 186
Items of Special Interest.................................... 187
Access to mental health care............................. 187
Battlefield analgesia.................................... 187
Body composition standards............................... 188
Briefing on impact of TRICARE copays on utilization of
certain healthcare services............................ 188
Comprehensive brain health and treatment for special
operations forces...................................... 189
Comptroller General assessment of Department of Defense
health care provider adverse privileging actions....... 189
Continued collaboration between the Department of Defense
and Israeli institutions on medical research........... 189
Continued study and research on post-traumatic stress
disorder and traumatic brain injury.................... 190
Continuity of care in TRICARE's Extended Care Health
Program................................................ 190
Development of oral, ultra-long-acting, sustained-release
hypertension and diabetes therapeutics................. 190
Dietary supplement adverse event reporting............... 191
Domestic active pharmaceutical ingredient manufacturing
report................................................. 191
Electronic health record interoperability between the
Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs............ 191
Elimination of low-value healthcare...................... 192
Improvements to healthcare for Active-Duty women......... 193
Integrated training for Army first responders and medical
professionals.......................................... 194
Integration of biometric synthetic training technologies
to support better health outcomes...................... 194
Market price generics program............................ 194
Medical necessity and prior authorization process for
non-covered drugs in the TRICARE program............... 195
Mobile application to enable periodic health assessments
for National Guard members............................. 195
Musculoskeletal injury prevention........................ 196
National Disaster Medical System Pilot Program........... 196
National public health emergency and disaster medical
network model.......................................... 196
Non-helmet preventative devices for traumatic brain
injury................................................. 197
Plasma-derived antibody products......................... 197
Point-of-care ultrasound system in the tactical combat
casualty care environment.............................. 197
Pooled testing to promote bio-surveillance of disease
outbreaks.............................................. 198
Prevention of hemorrhagic death with next generation
freeze-dried platelets................................. 198
Review of maternal deaths at military treatment
facilities............................................. 198
Selected Reserve separation history and physical
examinations........................................... 199
Synchronized procurement of combat medical kits.......... 199
Therapeutic research for traumatic brain injury.......... 200
Trauma and public health training........................ 200
TRICARE healthcare delivery demonstration project
contracting............................................ 200
TRICARE healthcare delivery demonstrations............... 201
Trusted domestic vaccine supplier capability............. 201
Virtual health expansion................................. 202
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND
RELATED MATTERS................................................ 203
Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management................
Repeal of preference for fixed-price contracts (sec. 801) 203
Improving the use of available data to manage and
forecast service contract requirements (sec. 802)...... 203
Assessment of impediments and incentives to improving the
acquisition of commercial technology, products, and
services (sec. 803).................................... 204
Pilot program on acquisition practices for emerging
technologies (sec. 804)................................ 205
Annual report on highest and lowest performing
acquisition programs of the Department of Defense (sec.
805)................................................... 205
Systems engineering determinations (sec. 806)............ 205
Subtitle B--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities,
Procedures, and Limitations................................ 206
Recommendations on the use of other transaction authority
(sec. 811)............................................. 206
Modified condition for prompt contract payment
eligibility (sec. 812)................................. 206
Exclusion of certain services from intergovernmental
support agreements for installation-support services
(sec. 813)............................................. 207
Modification of prize authority for advanced technology
achievements (sec. 814)................................ 207
Cost or pricing data reporting in Department of Defense
contracts (sec. 815)................................... 207
Authority to acquire innovative commercial products and
services using general solicitation competitive
procedures (sec. 816).................................. 207
Reporting requirement for defense acquisition activities
(sec. 817)............................................. 207
Department of Defense contractor professional training
material disclosure requirements (sec. 818)............ 208
Report on place of performance requirements (sec. 819)... 208
Multiyear contract authority for defense acquisitions
specifically authorized by law (sec. 820).............. 208
Subtitle C--Industrial Base Matters.......................... 209
Addition of certain items to list of high priority goods
and services for analyses, recommendations, and actions
related to sourcing and industrial capacity (sec. 831). 209
Prohibition on acquisition of personal protective
equipment from non-allied foreign nations (sec. 832)... 209
Further prohibition on acquisition of sensitive materials
(sec. 833)............................................. 209
Requirement for industry days and requests for
information to be open to allied defense contractors
(sec. 834)............................................. 209
Assessment of requirements for certain items to address
supply chain vulnerabilities (sec. 835)................ 209
Requirement that certain providers of systems to
Department of Defense disclose the source of printed
circuit boards when sourced from certain countries
(sec. 836)............................................. 209
Employment transparency regarding individuals who perform
work in the People's Republic of China (sec. 837)...... 210
Subtitle D--Small Business Matters........................... 210
Clarification of duties of Director of Small Business
Programs (sec. 841).................................... 210
Data on Phase III Small Business Innovation Research and
Small Business Technology Transfer program awards (sec.
842)................................................... 210
Pilot program to incentivize employee ownership in
defense contracting (sec. 843)......................... 211
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 211
Technology protection features activities (sec. 851)..... 211
Independent study on technical debt in software-intensive
systems (sec. 852)..................................... 211
Determination with respect to optical fiber transmission
equipment for Department of Defense purposes (sec. 853) 212
Two-year extension of Selected Acquisition Report
requirement (sec. 854)................................. 212
Military standards for high-hardness armor in combat
vehicle specifications (sec. 855)...................... 212
Revisions to the Unified Facilities Criteria regarding
the use of variable refrigerant flow systems (sec. 856) 213
Items of Special Interest.................................... 213
Acquisition of synthetic graphite material............... 213
Agile weapons system sustainment......................... 213
Comptroller General review of flexible budget and
financial management authorities....................... 214
Incentives to promote the use of energy efficient
manufacturing technologies............................. 214
National technology and industrial base.................. 214
Past performance by subcontractors and predecessor
companies.............................................. 215
Policy modeling and testing.............................. 215
Report on contracting for procurement of body armor...... 216
Report on life cycle share-in-savings contracts.......... 217
Small Business Innovation Research and commercial item
purchasing program training............................ 217
Small Business Innovation Research and the Small Business
Technology Transfer programs........................... 218
Submission of selected acquisition reports............... 218
Support of fourth-party logistics program................ 219
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT...... 221
Change in eligibility requirements for appointment to
certain Department of Defense leadership positions
(sec. 901)............................................. 221
Renaming of Air National Guard to Air and Space National
Guard (sec. 902)....................................... 222
Joint Aviation Safety Council (sec. 903)................. 222
Assignments for participants in the John S. McCain
Strategic Defense Fellows Program (sec. 904)........... 222
Alignment of Close Combat Lethality Task Force (sec. 905) 222
Management innovation activities (sec. 906).............. 223
Items of Special Interest.................................... 224
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and
Low Intensity Conflict................................. 224
Component content management systems..................... 225
Personnel requirements for functions previously carried
out by the Chief Management Officer.................... 225
Remote work information technology....................... 225
Workforce management training............................ 226
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS...................................... 227
Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................ 227
General transfer authority (sec. 1001)................... 227
Commission on Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and
Execution Reform (sec. 1002)........................... 227
Plan for consolidation of information technology systems
used in the planning, programming, budgeting, and
execution process (sec. 1003).......................... 228
Subtitle B--Counterdrug Activities........................... 228
Codification and expansion of authority for joint task
forces of the Department of Defense to support law
enforcement agencies conducting counter-terrorism,
counter-illicit trafficking, or counter-transnational
organized crime activities (sec. 1011)................. 228
Extension of authority to support a unified counterdrug
and counterterrorism campaign in Colombia (sec. 1012).. 228
Subtitle C--Naval Vessels.................................... 229
Modification to annual naval vessel construction plan
(sec. 1021)............................................ 229
Navy battle force ship assessment and requirement
reporting (sec. 1022).................................. 229
Subtitle D--Counterterrorism................................. 229
Extension of prohibition on use of funds for transfer or
release of individuals detained at United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the United States
(sec. 1031)............................................ 229
Extension of prohibition on use of funds to construct or
modify facilities in the United States to house
detainees transferred from United States Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec. 1032)....................... 229
Extension of prohibition on use of funds for transfer or
release of individuals detained at United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to certain countries
(sec. 1033)............................................ 229
Extension of prohibition on use of funds to close or
relinquish control of United States Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec. 1034)....................... 230
Report on medical care provided to detainees at United
States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec. 1035). 230
Subtitle E--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations........ 230
Notification of significant Army force structure changes
(sec. 1041)............................................ 230
Extension of admission to Guam or the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands for certain nonimmigrant H-2B
workers (sec. 1042).................................... 230
Subtitle F--Studies and Reports.............................. 231
Report on implementation of irregular warfare strategy
(sec. 1051)............................................ 231
Optimization of Irregular Warfare Technical Support
Directorate (sec. 1052)................................ 231
Quarterly briefings on anomalous health incidents (sec.
1053).................................................. 231
Subtitle G--Other Matters.................................... 232
Commission on the National Defense Strategy (sec. 1061).. 232
Assessment of requirements for and management of Army
three-dimensional terrain data (sec. 1062)............. 233
Modification to Regional Centers for Security Studies
(sec. 1063)............................................ 233
Items of Special Interest.................................... 234
Access to Sensitive Compartmented Information............ 234
Appreciation for Department of Defense response to the
coronavirus pandemic................................... 234
Arctic weather observations.............................. 235
Assessment of hostile respiratory diseases............... 235
Assessment of hostile use of zoonotic diseases........... 235
Assessment of missile salvo defense capabilities and
capacity............................................... 236
Comparative assessment of naval shipbuilding costs....... 236
Maritime domain information sharing...................... 237
Navy capabilities in the Arctic region................... 237
Navy surface warfare training............................ 238
Overseas contingency operations budget exhibits.......... 239
TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS............................. 241
Civilian personnel management (sec. 1101)................ 241
Consideration of employee performance in reductions in
force for civilian positions in the Department of
Defense (sec. 1102).................................... 241
Enhancement of recusal for conflicts of personal interest
requirements for Department of Defense officers and
employees (sec. 1103).................................. 241
Authority to employ civilian faculty members at the
Defense Institute of International Legal Studies (sec.
1104).................................................. 241
Extension of temporary increase in maximum amount of
voluntary separation incentive pay authorized for
civilian employees of the Department of Defense (sec.
1105).................................................. 241
One-year extension of temporary authority to grant
allowances, benefits, and gratuities to civilian
personnel on official duty in a combat zone (sec. 1106) 242
One-year extension of authority to waive annual
limitation on premium pay and aggregate limitation on
pay for Federal civilian employees working overseas
(sec. 1107)............................................ 242
Pilot program on direct hire authority for spouses of
members of the uniformed services at locations outside
the United States (sec. 1108).......................... 242
Civilian Cybersecurity Reserve pilot project at United
States Cyber Command (sec. 1109)....................... 242
Items of Special Interest.................................... 242
Limiting the number of local wage areas defined within a
pay locality........................................... 242
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS................... 245
Subtitle A--Assistance and Training.......................... 245
Authority to build capacity for additional operations
(sec. 1201)............................................ 245
Administrative support and payment of certain expenses
for covered foreign defense personnel (sec. 1202)...... 245
Authority for certain reimbursable interchange of
supplies and services (sec. 1203)...................... 245
Extension and modification of Department of Defense
support for stabilization activities in national
security interest of the United States (sec. 1204)..... 246
Temporary authority to pay for personnel expenses of
foreign national security forces participating in the
training program of the United States-Colombia Action
Plan for Regional Security (sec. 1205)................. 246
Security cooperation strategy for certain combatant
commands (sec. 1206)................................... 246
Plan for enhancing Western Hemisphere security
cooperation (sec. 1207)................................ 247
Pilot program to support the implementation of the Women,
Peace, and Security Act of 2017 (sec. 1208)............ 247
Limitation on support to military forces of the Kingdom
of Morocco for bilateral or multilateral exercises
(sec. 1209)............................................ 247
Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Afghanistan and Pakistan..... 247
Extension and modification of authority for support for
reconciliation activities led by the Government of
Afghanistan and prohibition on use of funds for the
Taliban and other terrorist groups (sec. 1211)......... 247
Extension and modification of authority for reimbursement
of certain coalition nations for support provided to
United States military operations (sec. 1212).......... 248
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (sec. 1213)............. 248
Quarterly security briefings on Afghanistan (sec. 1214).. 248
Sense of Senate and briefing on counterterrorism posture
of the United States after transition of United States
Armed Forces from Afghanistan (sec. 1215).............. 249
Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Syria, Iraq, and Iran........ 249
Extension and modification of authority to provide
assistance to vetted Syrian groups and individuals
(sec. 1221)............................................ 249
Extension and modification of authority to support
operations and activities of the Office of Security
Cooperation in Iraq (sec. 1222)........................ 249
Extension and modification of authority to provide
assistance to counter the Islamic State of Iraq and
Syria (sec. 1223)...................................... 249
Subtitle D--Matters Relating to Europe and the Russian
Federation................................................. 250
Extension of limitation on military cooperation between
the United States and the Russian Federation (sec.
1231).................................................. 250
Extension of prohibition on availability of funds
relating to sovereignty of the Russian Federation over
Crimea (sec. 1232)..................................... 250
Extension of Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (sec.
1233).................................................. 250
Extension of authority for training for Eastern European
national security forces in the course of multilateral
exercises (sec. 1234).................................. 251
Sense of Senate on the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(sec. 1235)............................................ 251
Sense of Senate on continuing support for Estonia,
Latvia, and Lithuania (sec. 1236)...................... 251
Subtitle E--Matters Relating to the Indo-Pacific Region...... 251
Extension and modification of Indo-Pacific Maritime
Security Initiative (sec. 1241)........................ 251
Extension and modification of Pacific Deterrence
Initiative (sec. 1242)................................. 252
Extension of authority to transfer funds for Bien Hoa
dioxin cleanup (sec. 1243)............................. 252
Cooperative program with Vietnam to account for
Vietnamese personnel missing in action (sec. 1244)..... 252
Assessment of and plan for improving the defensive
asymmetric capabilities of Taiwan (sec. 1245).......... 252
Annual feasibility briefing on cooperation between the
National Guard and Taiwan (sec. 1246).................. 252
Defense of Taiwan (sec. 1247)............................ 253
Comparative analyses and report on efforts by the United
States and the People's Republic of China to advance
critical modernization technology with respect to
military applications (sec. 1248)...................... 253
Modification of annual report on military and security
developments involving the People's Republic of China
(sec. 1249)............................................ 253
Feasibility report on establishing more robust military-
to-military crisis communications with the People's
Republic of China (sec. 1250).......................... 254
Semiannual briefings on efforts to deter Chinese
aggression and military coercion (sec. 1251)........... 254
Sense of Congress on defense alliances and partnerships
in the Indo-Pacific region (sec. 1252)................. 254
Subtitle F--Reports.......................................... 254
Report on security cooperation authorities and associated
resourcing in support of the Security Force Assistance
Brigades (sec. 1261)................................... 254
Independent assessment with respect to Arctic region and
establishment of Arctic Security Initiative (sec. 1262) 255
Annual report and briefing on Global Force Management
Allocation Plan (sec. 1263)............................ 255
Subtitle G--Others Matters................................... 255
Modification of United States-Israel Operations-
Technology cooperation within the United States-Israel
Defense Acquisition Advisory Group (sec. 1271)......... 255
Prohibition on support for offensive military operations
against the Houthis in Yemen (sec. 1272)............... 255
Repeal of authorization of non-conventional assisted
recovery capabilities; modification of authority for
expenditure of funds for clandestine activities that
support operational preparation of the environment
(sec. 1273)............................................ 256
Extension and modification of authority for certain
payments to redress injury and loss (sec. 1274)........ 256
Secretary of Defense Strategic Competition Initiative
(sec. 1275)............................................ 256
Strategic competition initiative for United States
Southern Command and United States Africa Command (sec.
1276).................................................. 257
Modification of notification requirements for sensitive
military operations (sec. 1277)........................ 257
Special Operations Forces joint operating concept for
competition and conflict (sec. 1278)................... 258
Plan for provision of information support to commanders
of the combatant commands (sec. 1279).................. 258
Independent review of and report on the Unified Command
Plan (sec. 1280)....................................... 258
Establishment of mission-oriented pilot programs to close
significant capabilities gaps (sec. 1281).............. 258
Limitation on availability of certain funding for
operation and maintenance (sec. 1282).................. 259
Items of Special Interest.................................... 259
Assessment of China-Russia Security Cooperation.......... 259
Briefing on efforts to provide credible options to
respond to the use of force by China to alter the
status quo with respect to Taiwan...................... 260
Comptroller General review of European Deterrence
Initiative............................................. 260
Comptroller General review of logistics in the European
theater................................................ 261
Comptroller General review of the approval process for
contact between Department of Defense personnel and
Chinese government officials........................... 262
Cyber cooperation with Vietnam, Thailand, and Indonesia.. 262
Defense cooperation with Taiwan.......................... 263
Developing country definition............................ 263
Distributed airfields and ports for dispersed operations. 263
Ensuring the safety of America's Afghan allies........... 264
Forward deployed naval forces in Europe.................. 264
Medical support for Ukrainian soldiers................... 265
Military mobility in Europe.............................. 265
Operational support to Afghanistan National Defense and
Security Forces........................................ 266
Participation by Taiwan in multilateral security
dialogues and forums................................... 266
Plan for maintaining oversight of funds and activities of
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund....................... 267
Public reporting of Chinese military companies operating
in the United States................................... 267
Support to Kurdish Peshmerga for counterterrorism and
border security operations............................. 268
United States support to partner military medical
services............................................... 268
United States--Greenland strategic relationship.......... 269
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION......................... 271
Funding allocations; specification of Cooperative Threat
Reduction funds (sec. 1301)................................ 271
Items of Special Interest.................................... 271
Training for Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support
Teams.................................................. 271
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.................................. 273
Subtitle A--Military Programs................................ 273
Working capital funds (sec. 1401)........................ 273
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense (sec.
1402).................................................. 273
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-
wide (sec. 1403)....................................... 273
Defense Inspector General (sec. 1404).................... 273
Defense Health Program (sec. 1405)....................... 273
Subtitle B--Armed Forces Retirement Home..................... 273
Authorization of appropriations for Armed Forces
Retirement Home (sec. 1411)............................ 273
Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 274
Authorization to loan materials in National Defense
Stockpile (sec. 1421).................................. 274
Repeal of termination of biennial report on National
Defense Stockpile requirements (sec. 1422)............. 274
Authority for transfer of funds to joint Department of
Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility
Demonstration Fund for Captain James A. Lovell Health
Care Center, Illinois (sec. 1423)...................... 274
TITLE XV--SPACE ACTIVITIES, STRATEGIC PROGRAMS, AND INTELLIGENCE
MATTERS........................................................ 275
Subtitle A--Space Activities................................. 275
Delegation of authorities to Space Development Agency
(sec. 1501)............................................ 275
Modification to Space Development Agency (sec. 1502)..... 275
Disclosure of National Security Space Launch program
contract pricing terms (sec. 1503)..................... 275
Extension and modification of Council on Oversight of the
Department of Defense Positioning, Navigation, and
Timing Enterprise (sec. 1504).......................... 276
Senior Procurement Executive authority (sec. 1505)....... 276
Modifications to Space Force Acquisition Council (sec.
1506).................................................. 276
Modifications relating to the Assistant Secretary of the
Air Force for Space Acquisition and Integration (sec.
1507).................................................. 276
Modification to transfer of acquisition projects for
space systems and programs (sec. 1508)................. 277
Extension and modification of certifications regarding
integrated tactical warning and attack assessment
mission of the Air Force (sec. 1509)................... 277
Prohibition on Missile Defense Agency production of
satellites and ground systems associated with operation
of such satellites (sec. 1510)......................... 277
Continued requirement for National Security Space Launch
program (sec. 1511).................................... 278
Limitation, report, and briefing on use of commercial
satellite services and associated systems (sec. 1512).. 278
Study on commercial systems integration into, and support
of, Armed Forces space operations (sec. 1513).......... 278
Space policy review (sec. 1514).......................... 279
Annual briefing on threats to space operations (sec.
1515).................................................. 279
Subtitle B--Defense Intelligence and Intelligence-Related
Activities................................................. 279
Authority for Army counterintelligence agents to execute
warrants and make arrests (sec. 1521).................. 279
Annual briefing by Director of the Defense Intelligence
Agency on electronic warfare threat to operations of
the Department of Defense (sec. 1522).................. 279
Subtitle C--Nuclear Forces................................... 280
Participation in United States Strategic Command
strategic deterrence exercises (sec. 1531)............. 280
Modification to requirements relating to nuclear force
reductions (sec. 1532)................................. 280
Modifications to requirements relating to unilateral
changes in nuclear weapons stockpile of the United
States (sec. 1533)..................................... 281
Deadline for reports on modification of force structure
for strategic nuclear weapons delivery systems (sec.
1534).................................................. 281
Modification of deadline for notifications relating to
reduction, consolidation, or withdrawal of nuclear
forces based in Europe (sec. 1535)..................... 281
Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the
United States (sec. 1536).............................. 281
Revised Nuclear Posture Review (sec. 1537)............... 282
Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent development program
accountability matrices (sec. 1538).................... 282
Procurement authority for certain parts of Ground-Based
Strategic Deterrent cryptographic device (sec. 1539)... 283
Mission-design series popular name for Ground-Based
Strategic Deterrent (sec. 1540)........................ 283
B-21 Raider nuclear capability and integration with Long-
Range Standoff Weapon (sec. 1541)...................... 283
Comptroller General study and updated report on nuclear
weapons capabilities and force structure requirements
(sec. 1542)............................................ 284
Prohibition on reduction of the intercontinental
ballistic missiles of the United States (sec. 1543).... 285
Limitation on use of funds until completion of analysis
of alternatives for nuclear sea-launched cruise missile
(sec. 1544)............................................ 285
Sense of the Senate on NATO security and nuclear
cooperation between the United States and the United
Kingdom (sec. 1545).................................... 286
Sense of the Senate on maintaining diversity in the
nuclear weapons stockpile (sec. 1546).................. 286
Sense of the Senate on the Ground-Based Strategic
Deterrent (sec. 1547).................................. 286
Subtitle D--Missile Defense Programs......................... 286
Authority to develop and deploy Next Generation
Interceptor for missile defense of the United States
homeland (sec. 1551)................................... 286
Annual reliability testing for the Next Generation
Interceptor (sec. 1552)................................ 287
Next Generation Interceptor program accountability
matrices (sec. 1553)................................... 287
Extension of period for transition of ballistic missile
defense programs to military departments (sec. 1554)... 287
Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system and Israeli
cooperative missile defense program co-development and
co-production (sec. 1555).............................. 288
Semiannual updates on meetings held by the Missile
Defense Executive Board (sec. 1556).................... 288
Independent study of Department of Defense components'
roles and responsibilities relating to missile defense
(sec. 1557)............................................ 288
Items of Special Interest.................................... 289
Alternate position, navigation, and timing in space...... 289
Briefing on advanced missile defense technology
development............................................ 289
Briefing on Air Force efforts to facilitate
intercontinental ballistic missile movements during the
transition to the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent..... 290
Briefing on alignment of Missile Defense Agency's space
development activities................................. 290
Briefing on protection of Air Force nuclear storage
facilities............................................. 290
Commercial cloud computing in military space programs.... 290
Commercial Space Technologies............................ 291
Cybersecurity of Missile Defense Systems................. 291
Detection Capability of Homeland Defense Radar--Hawaii... 292
Geophysical detection of nuclear proliferation........... 293
Integrated satellite communications strategy............. 293
Laser threats to low earth orbit constellations.......... 294
Long-term oversight of the Department of Defense's
efforts to deploy Overhead Persistent Infrared space-
based architectures.................................... 294
Mix of media study audit................................. 295
Responsive launch prize.................................. 296
Review of Ballistic Missile Defense Readiness and
Sustainment............................................ 296
Space Force Combatant Commander Integrated Command and
Control System......................................... 297
Tactical satellite commutations capability............... 297
Tactically Responsive Space Launch....................... 298
Use of commercial space-based Intelligence, Surveillance,
and Reconnaissance by the combatant commands........... 298
B-52 Commercial Engine Replacement Program (CERP)........ 299
Multi-actor deterrence methodology....................... 299
Intelligent electronic protection technologies........... 299
Global Nuclear Landscape................................. 299
Report on mitigating the impact of space debris.......... 300
National Security Space Launch emerging requirements..... 300
High energy laser technology integration................. 301
Leveraging commercial space domain awareness capability,
data, products and services............................ 301
TITLE XVI--CYBERSPACE-RELATED MATTERS............................ 303
Matters concerning cyber personnel requirements (sec.
1601).................................................. 303
Cyber data management (sec. 1602)........................ 303
Assignment of certain budget control responsibilities to
Commander of United States Cyber Command (sec. 1603)... 304
Coordination between United States Cyber Command and
private sector (sec. 1604)............................. 304
Pilot program on public-private partnerships with
internet ecosystem companies to detect and disrupt
adversary cyber operations (sec. 1605)................. 304
Zero trust strategy, principles, model architecture, and
implementation plans (sec. 1606)....................... 305
Demonstration program for automated security validation
tools (sec. 1607)...................................... 305
Improvements to consortium of universities to advise
Secretary of Defense on cybersecurity matters (sec.
1608).................................................. 306
Quarterly reports on cyber operations (sec. 1609)........ 306
Assessment of cybersecurity posture and operational
assumptions and development of targeting strategies and
supporting capabilities (sec. 1610).................... 307
Assessing capabilities to counter adversary use of
ransomware tools, capabilities, and infrastructure
(sec. 1611)............................................ 307
Comparative analysis of cybersecurity capabilities (sec.
1612).................................................. 308
Report on the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification
program (sec. 1613)........................................ 308
Report on potential Department of Defense support and
assistance for increasing the awareness of the
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency of cyber
threats and vulnerabilities affecting critical
infrastructure (sec. 1614)................................. 309
Deadline for reports on assessment of cyber resiliency of
nuclear command and control system (sec. 1615)............. 309
Items of Special Interest.................................... 309
Advanced capabilities for Department of Defense red teams 309
Application of commercial off-the-shelf solutions to
address intelligence and operations gaps............... 310
Assessment of need for Cyber Intelligence Center and War
Game Center............................................ 310
Comptroller General assessment of the Department of
Defense information technology supply chain............ 311
Cybersecurity training at Critical Training Centers...... 312
Improving Department of Defense guidance for weapon
system acquisitions cybersecurity requirements......... 312
Prioritizing cyber vulnerability remediations............ 313
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS................. 315
Summary and explanation of funding tables.................... 315
Short title (sec. 2001)...................................... 315
Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be
specified by law (sec. 2002)............................... 315
Effective date (sec. 2003)................................... 316
TITLE XXI--ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION............................ 317
Summary...................................................... 317
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects
(sec. 2101)................................................ 317
Family housing (sec. 2102)................................... 317
Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2103)............ 317
Extension of authorization of fiscal year 2017 project at
Wiesbaden Army Airfield (sec. 2104)........................ 317
Additional authority to carry out fiscal year 2018 project at
Fort Bliss, Texas (sec. 2105).............................. 318
Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 2021
project at Fort Wainwright, Alaska (sec. 2106)............. 318
Additional authority to carry out fiscal year 2022 project at
Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland (sec. 2107).............. 318
TITLE XXII--NAVY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION........................... 319
Summary...................................................... 319
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects
(sec. 2201)................................................ 319
Family housing (sec. 2202)................................... 319
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203).... 319
Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204)............ 319
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION..................... 321
Summary...................................................... 321
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2301)....................................... 321
Family housing (sec. 2302)................................... 321
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303).... 321
Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)....... 321
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2017
projects (sec. 2305)....................................... 322
Extension of authorizations of fiscal year 2017 projects at
Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany (sec. 2306).................. 322
Extension of authorization of fiscal year 2017 project at
Hanscom Air Force Base, Massachusetts (sec. 2307).......... 322
Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 2018
project at Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida (sec. 2308)..... 322
Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 2020
projects at Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida (sec. 2309).... 322
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES MILITARY CONSTRUCTION............... 323
Summary...................................................... 323
Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2401)....................................... 323
Authorized Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment
Program projects (sec. 2402)............................... 323
Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies (sec. 2403) 323
Extension of authorization of fiscal year 2017 project at
Yokota Air Base, Japan (sec. 2404)......................... 323
TITLE XXV--INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS................................ 325
Summary...................................................... 325
Subtitle A--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security
Investment Program......................................... 325
Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2501)................................... 325
Authorization of appropriations, NATO (sec. 2502)........ 325
Subtitle B--Host Country In-Kind Contributions............... 325
Republic of Korea funded construction projects (sec.
2511).................................................. 325
Republic of Poland provided infrastructure projects (sec.
2512)...................................................... 325
Authorization to accept contributions from the Republic of
Korea in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit (sec.
2513)...................................................... 326
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES.................. 327
Summary...................................................... 327
Authorized Army National Guard construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2601)........................... 327
Authorized Army Reserve construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2602)....................................... 327
Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve construction
and land acquisition projects (sec. 2603).................. 327
Authorized Air National Guard construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2604)........................... 327
Authorized Air Force Reserve construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2605)........................... 328
Authorization of appropriations, National Guard and Reserve
(sec. 2606)................................................ 328
TITLE XXVII--BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES............. 329
Summary and explanation of tables............................ 329
Authorization of appropriations for base realignment and
closure activities funded through Department of Defense
Base Closure Account (sec. 2701)........................... 329
Prohibition on conducting additional base realignment and
closure (BRAC) round (sec. 2702)........................... 329
TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL PROVISIONS....... 331
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program.................... 331
Clarification of establishment of the Office of Local
Defense Community Cooperation as a Department of
Defense Field Activity (sec. 2801)..................... 331
Use of amounts available for operation and maintenance in
carrying out military construction projects for energy
resilience, energy security, or energy conservation
(sec. 2802)............................................ 331
Subtitle B--Military Family Housing.......................... 331
Command oversight of military privatized housing as
element of performance evaluations (sec. 2811)......... 331
Clarification of prohibition against collection from
tenants of privatized military housing units of amounts
in addition to rent and application of existing law
(sec. 2812)............................................ 331
Modification of calculation of military housing
contractor pay for privatized military housing (sec.
2813).................................................. 332
Modification of requirements relating to window fall
prevention devices at military family housing (sec.
2814).................................................. 332
Subtitle C--Land Conveyances................................. 332
Land conveyance, St. Louis, Missouri (sec. 2821)......... 332
Land conveyance, Saint Joseph, Missouri (sec. 2822)...... 332
Land conveyance, Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point,
North Carolina (sec. 2823)............................. 333
Land conveyance, Naval Air Station Oceana, Virginia
Beach, Virginia (sec. 2824)............................ 333
Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 333
Consideration of public education when making basing
decisions (sec. 2831).................................. 333
Designation of facility at Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois
(sec. 2832)............................................ 333
Improvement of security of lodging and living spaces on
military installations (sec. 2833)..................... 333
Expansion of authority of Secretary of the Navy to lease
and license Navy museum facilities to generate revenue
to support museum administration and operations (sec.
2834).................................................. 333
Pilot program on establishment of account for
reimbursement for use of testing facilities at
installations of the Department of the Air Force (sec.
2835).................................................. 334
Items of Special Interest.................................... 334
Army mobilization and training infrastructure............ 334
Army National Guard readiness centers.................... 335
Army Training Land Retention Program..................... 336
Briefing on feasibility of integrated project delivery
for military construction.............................. 336
Child development centers................................ 336
Comptroller General review of excess infrastructure...... 337
Comptroller General review of military barracks.......... 338
Disaster recovery at Offutt Air Force Base and Tyndall
Air Force Base......................................... 339
Feasibility of relocating Yuma community site............ 339
Fleet Readiness Center East and Marine Corps Air Station. 339
Cherry Point facilities brief............................ 339
General Mitchell International Airport pipeline project.. 340
Hawaii Infrastructure Readiness Initiative............... 341
Improving budgeting for barracks and dormitory in failing
conditions............................................. 341
Improving on-base housing waitlists...................... 342
Joint-use facilities briefing............................ 343
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln Lab........ 343
Engineering Prototyping Facility construction............ 343
Privatized lodging program............................... 344
Realizing B-21 depot land acquisition savings............ 344
Report on improving Army Family Housing at Fort McNair,
Washington, D.C........................................ 345
Review of restricted use easements....................... 346
Sustainable building materials........................... 347
Unspecified Minor Military Construction.................. 347
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS
AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS....................................... 349
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS...... 349
Subtitle A--National Security Programs and Authorizations.... 349
National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101)..... 349
Defense environmental cleanup (sec. 3102)................ 349
Other defense activities (sec. 3103)..................... 349
Nuclear energy (sec. 3104)............................... 349
Subtitle B--Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Matters................ 349
Portfolio management framework for National Nuclear
Security Administration (sec. 3111).................... 349
Reports on risks to and gaps in industrial base for
nuclear weapons components, subsystems, and materials
(sec. 3112)............................................ 350
Sense of Senate on oversight role of Congress in conduct
of nuclear weapons testing (sec. 3113)................. 350
Subtitle C--Defense Environmental Cleanup Matters............ 351
Part I--Environmental Management Liability Reduction and
Technology Development................................. 351
Environmental management liability reduction and
technology development (secs. 3121-3125)........... 351
Part II--Other Matters................................... 351
Comprehensive strategy for treating, storing, and
disposing of defense nuclear waste resulting from
stockpile maintenance and modernization activities
(sec. 3131)........................................ 351
Subtitle D--Budget and Financial Management Matters.......... 352
Improvements to cost estimates informing analyses of
alternatives (sec. 3141)............................... 352
Modification of requirements for certain construction
projects (sec. 3142)................................... 352
Modification to terminology for reports of financial
balances for atomic energy defense activities (sec.
3143).................................................. 352
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 352
Extension of authority for appointment of certain
scientific, engineering, and technical personnel (sec.
3151).................................................. 352
Extension of enhanced procurement authority to manage
supply chain risk (sec. 3152).......................... 353
Extension of authority for acceptance of contributions
for acceleration of removal or security of fissile
materials, radiological materials, and related
equipment at vulnerable sites worldwide (sec. 3153).... 353
Updates to Infrastructure Modernization Initiative (sec.
3154).................................................. 353
Acquisition of high-performance computing capabilities by
National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3155)... 354
Limitation on use of funds for naval nuclear fuel systems
based on low-enriched uranium (sec. 3156).............. 354
Budget Items................................................. 355
National Nuclear Security Administration Production
Modernization--depleted uranium modernization.......... 355
National Nuclear Security Administration Stockpile
Research, Technology and Engineering................... 355
National Nuclear Security Administration Infrastructure
and Operations......................................... 356
National Nuclear Security Administration Secure
Transportation Asset................................... 356
National Nuclear Security Administration Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation....................................... 356
Department of Energy Environmental Management--Hanford
River Corridor and other cleanup operations............ 356
Department of Energy Environmental Management--Hanford
Office of River Protection Tank Farm Activities........ 357
Department of Energy Environmental Management National
Nuclear Security Administration Sites and Nevada
Offsite: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory excess
facility decontamination and decommissioning........... 357
Department of Energy Environmental Management: Oak Ridge
Nuclear Facility Decontamination and Decommissioning... 357
Department of Energy Environmental Management--Savannah
River Nuclear Materials Stabilization and Disposition.. 357
Department of Energy Environmental Management--Savannah
River Community and Regulatory Support................. 357
Department of Energy Environmental Management--Uranium
Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund.... 358
Department of Energy Legacy Management--Formerly Utilized
Sites Remedial Action Program.......................... 358
Items of Special Interest.................................... 358
Acquisition planning and impacts of choice of contract
type on performance.................................... 358
Applying knowledge-based acquisitions framework to
weapons modernization programs......................... 359
Assessment of Department of Energy's Office of
Environmental Management cleanup at Los Alamos National
Laboratory............................................. 360
Briefing on options for accelerating the reestablishment
of domestic uranium enrichment capabilities............ 360
Continued oversight of lithium........................... 361
Continuing Comptroller General evaluation of the Hanford
Waste Treatment Plant.................................. 361
Continuing Comptroller General oversight of Waste
Isolation Pilot Plant.................................. 361
Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management's
End State Contracting.................................. 361
Direct-feed high-level waste at the Hanford Site......... 361
Greater-Than-Class C waste disposal...................... 363
Kansas City National Security Campus planning............ 363
Limitations to Nuclear Weapons Availability to the
Department of Defense.................................. 364
Long term support for the Nevada National Security Site.. 365
Minor construction projects of the Department of Energy.. 365
Performance of depleted uranium hexafluoride conversion
facilities............................................. 365
Report on options for maintaining W80-4, W87-1, and W93
program schedules despite interruptions in strategic
materials availability................................. 366
Review of Integrated Master Schedule and Program
Management Plan for Los Alamos pit production.......... 367
Review of plutonium infrastructure at the National
Nuclear Security Administration........................ 368
Space and Atmospheric Burst Reporting System............. 368
Status of verification and monitoring capabilities....... 368
Supply chain and quality assurance for the National
Nuclear Security Administration........................ 369
Ten-year infrastructure and facilities plan for inertial
confinement fusion program............................. 370
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD............. 371
Authorization (sec. 3201).................................... 371
References to chairperson and vice chairperson of Defense
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (sec. 3202)................ 371
TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION.............................. 373
Maritime Administration (sec. 3501).......................... 373
DIVISION D--FUNDING TABLES....................................... 375
Authorization of amounts in funding tables (sec. 4001)....... 375
TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT........................................... 383
Procurement (sec. 4101)...................................... 384
Procurement for overseas contingency operations (sec. 4102).. 429
TITLE XLII--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION.......... 429
Research, development, test, and evaluation (sec. 4201)...... 430
Research, development, test, and evaluation for overseas
contingency operations (sec. 4202).........................
TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE........................... 475
Operation and maintenance (sec. 4301)........................ 476
Operation and maintenance for overseas contingency operations
(sec. 4302)................................................
TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL................................... 507
Military personnel (sec. 4401)............................... 508
Military personnel for overseas contingency operations (sec.
4402)......................................................
TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.................................. 509
Other authorizations (sec. 4501)............................. 510
Other authorizations for overseas contingency operations
(sec. 4502)................................................
TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION................................ 515
Military construction (sec. 4601)............................ 516
Military construction for overseas contingency operations
(sec. 4602)................................................
TITLE XLVII--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS..... 539
Department of Energy national security programs (sec. 4701).. 540
LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS......................................... 552
Departmental Recommendations................................. 552
Committee Action............................................. 552
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate.................... 555
Regulatory Impact............................................ 555
Changes In Exsisting Law..................................... 555
Calendar No. 129
117th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 117-39
======================================================================
TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022 FOR MILITARY
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND
FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE
MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
_______
September 22 (legislative day, September 21), 2021.--Ordered to be
printed
_______
Mr. Reed, from the Committee on Armed Services,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 2792]
The Committee on Armed Services reports favorably an
original bill (S. 2792) to authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2022 for military activities of the Department of Defense,
for military construction, and for defense activities of the
Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths
for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, and recommends
that the bill do pass.
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
This bill would:
(1) Authorize appropriations for (a) procurement, (b)
research, development, test and evaluation, (c)
operation and maintenance and the revolving and
management funds of the Department of Defense for
fiscal year 2022;
(2) Authorize the personnel end strengths for each
military active duty component of the Armed Forces for
fiscal year 2022;
(3) Authorize the personnel end strengths for the
Selected Reserve of each of the reserve components of
the Armed Forces for fiscal year 2022;
(4) Impose certain reporting requirements;
(5) Impose certain limitations with regard to
specific procurement and research, development, test
and evaluation actions and manpower strengths; provide
certain additional legislative authority, and make
certain changes to existing law;
(6) Authorize appropriations for military
construction programs of the Department of Defense for
fiscal year 2022; and
(7) Authorize appropriations for national security
programs of the Department of Energy for fiscal year
2022.
COMMITTEE OVERVIEW
Each year, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
authorizes funding levels and provides authorities for the U.S.
military and other critical defense priorities, ensuring our
troops have the training, equipment, and resources they need to
carry out their missions. On July 21, 2021, the Senate Armed
Services Committee voted in bipartisan fashion, 23-3, to
advance the NDAA for fiscal year 2022 to the Senate floor.
The United States is engaged in a strategic competition
with China and Russia, near-peer rivals that do not accept U.S.
global leadership or the international norms that have helped
keep the peace for the better part of a century. This strategic
competition is likely to intensify due to shifts in the
military balance of power and diverging visions of governance
models between China and Russia and the West. At the same time,
threats from other aggressors--rogue states like Iran and North
Korea, which seek to destabilize and antagonize, and terrorist
organizations, which threaten to re-emerge or expand not just
in the Middle East but in Africa and other parts of the world--
persist. These challenges are unfolding amidst a global
pandemic, environmental degradation, and the evolution of
disruptive technologies. The interconnected nature of these
threats will drive how the United States resources and
transforms its tools of national power to respond to these
complex security challenges.
To that end, the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2022:
(1) Strengthens the All-Volunteer Force and improves
the quality of life of the men and women of the total
force (Active Duty, National Guard, and Reserves),
their families, and Department of Defense civilian
personnel, while reinforcing the principles of a
strong, diverse, inclusive force; that force cohesion
requires a command climate that does not tolerate
extremism, sexual misconduct or sexual harassment; and
that quality health care is a fundamental necessity for
servicemembers and their families;
(2) Supports the Department of Defense and provides
the resources needed by the combatant commands to carry
out the National Defense Strategy and ensure the United
States can out-compete, deter, and prevail against
near-peer rivals, with a focus on strengthening our
posture in the Indo-Pacific region;
(3) Enhances deterrence by recapitalizing and
modernizing the U.S. nuclear triad; ensuring the
safety, security, and reliability of our nuclear
stockpile, delivery systems, and infrastructure;
increasing capacity in theater and homeland missile
defense; and strengthening nonproliferation programs;
(4) Accelerates the modernization of the Department
across all domains and operational capabilities by
investing in research and development of cutting-edge
technologies and delivering them in a timely manner to
the force;
(5) Improves the ability of our Armed Forces to
counter threats and promote U.S. freedom of action in
the information environment including by countering
information warfare, foreign malign influence,
competition below the level of direct conflict, and
hybrid warfare;
(6) Improves efficiencies in resource allocation
within the Department through transformations of the
planning and budgeting process, acquisition process,
and management structure and culture;
(7) Protects and strengthens our national security
industrial base by prioritizing supply chain security;
improving technology security; and investing in next-
generation technologies that will ensure U.S. military
competitiveness; and
(8) Strengthens existing U.S. alliances and
partnerships, builds mutually beneficial new
partnerships, and leverages opportunities in
international cooperation to ensure U.S. success in
competition against other great powers.
Meeting the challenges before the United States will
require bold and far-sighted national security decisions. The
fiscal year 2022 NDAA ensures that we have the policies and
resources to deter America's adversaries, reassure our allies,
and provide our forces with the tools and capabilities to
overcome threats around the globe.
BUDGETARY EFFECTS OF THIS ACT (SEC. 4)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
that the budgetary effects of this Act be determined in
accordance with the procedures established in the Statutory
Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (title I of Public Law 111-139).
SUMMARY OF DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS AND BUDGET AUTHORITY
IMPLICATION
The administration's budget request for national defense
discretionary programs within the jurisdiction of the Senate
Committee on Armed Services for fiscal year 2022 was $752.9
billion. Of this amount, $715 billion was requested for base
Department of Defense (DOD) programs and $27.9 billion was
requested for national security programs in the Department of
Energy (DOE).
The committee recommends an overall discretionary
authorization of $777.9 billion in fiscal year 2022 including
$740.3 billion for base DOD programs, $27.7 billion for
national security programs in the DOE, and $9.9 billion for
defense-related activities outside the jurisdiction of the
NDAA.
The table preceding the detailed program adjustments in
Division D of this bill summarizes the direct discretionary
authorizations in the committee recommendation and the
equivalent budget authority levels for fiscal year 2022 defense
programs. The table summarizes the committee's recommended
discretionary authorizations by appropriation account for
fiscal year 2022 and compares these amounts to the request.
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Authorization of appropriations (sec. 101)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriations for procurement activities at the levels
identified in section 4101 of division D of this Act.
Subtitle B--Army Programs
Multiyear procurement authority for AH-64E Apache helicopters (sec.
121)
The committee recommends a provision that would allow the
Secretary of the Army to enter into a multiyear contract for
AH-64E Apache helicopters beginning in fiscal year 2022 and
extending through fiscal year 2025, subject to the availability
of appropriations, with the potential for an additional fifth
year subject to need. Based on current estimates, the proposed
multiyear procurement (MYP) would provide cost saving
opportunities of $234.0 million as compared to annual contracts
and would facilitate industrial stability.
The AH-64E is a core aviation program and is approved for
full-rate production through the current future years defense
program (fiscal years 2021-2025). The minimum need for the AH-
64E is not expected to decrease during the contemplated MYP
period.
The committee expects the Secretary to have an approved
future years defense program prior to certification of any
multiyear contract in accordance with requirements in section
2306b of title 10, United States Code.
Multiyear procurement authority for UH-60M and HH-60M Black Hawk
helicopters (sec. 122)
The committee recommends a provision that would allow the
Secretary of the Army to enter into a multiyear contract for
UH/HH-60M Black Hawk helicopters beginning in fiscal year 2022
with an anticipated end in fiscal year 2026, subject to the
availability of appropriations. The proposed multiyear
procurement (MYP) would produce significant savings and
facilitate industrial stability. The proposed MYP would likely
result in a cost avoidance of $405.4 million or 16.0 percent
when compared to using five annual contracts. Additionally,
this proposal would stabilize the workforce and reduce
administrative burden for both the Army and contractor,
resulting in a greater efficiency in acquisition operations.
The committee expects the Secretary to have an approved
future years defense program prior to certification of any
multiyear contract in accordance with requirements in section
2306b of title 10, United States Code.
Report and limitations on acquisition of Integrated Visual Augmentation
System (sec. 123)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Army to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees not later than January 31, 2022, to
supplement a related reporting requirement included in the
William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283). The report would
require validation of system reliability, network adequacy,
power duration, terrain data sufficiency, operational basis-of-
issue, and plans for iterative improvements to the system over
the acquisition period. The provision would prohibit the
obligation of expenditure of more than 50 percent of fiscal
year 2022 funds authorized for the Integrated Visual
Augmentation System (IVAS) procurement until the required
report is submitted.
The committee believes that soldier-wearable technologies
such as the IVAS are essential for U.S. close-combat warriors
to maintain combat overmatch against future adversaries. The
committee commends the Army for utilizing a soldier-centric
approach and leveraging non-traditional industry partners in
development of the IVAS. The committee notes the Army's plans
for operational testing of the system at scope and scale to
ensure operational suitability and soldier acceptability, and
commends the Army for its soldier-centric acquisition approach.
Furthermore, the committee believes that continuous iterative
improvement of high-tech capabilities such as the IVAS is
essential for maintaining technological advantage and combat
overmatch of systems such as the IVAS.
Modification of deployment by the Army of interim cruise missile
defense capability (sec. 124)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
requirement for deployment of an interim cruise missile defense
capability required by section 112(b) of the John S. McCain
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public
Law 115-232), as amended by section 111 of the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (Public Law 116-239). The provision would eliminate the
requirement to procure the second two batteries of interim
capability for the purpose of prioritizing resources to the
enduring capability. The provision would not eliminate the
requirement for the Army to deploy or forward station interim
cruise missile defense capabilities.
Subtitle C--Navy Programs
Extension of prohibition on availability of funds for Navy port
waterborne security barriers (sec. 131)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
prohibition on availability of funds for Navy waterborne
security barriers.
The Navy has informed the committee of its intent to
transfer management of the waterborne security barriers program
to the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) and to establish a
single program office within NAVSEA to manage acquisition of
all waterborne security barriers for the Navy. The committee
commends the Navy for taking positive steps to implement a
proper acquisition structure for this important effort.
Analysis of certain radar investment options (sec. 132)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Director of the Office of Cost Assessment and Program
Evaluation (CAPE) to conduct an independent review of the three
radar systems supporting current Aegis combat systems of the
Navy and the Missile Defense Agency in the fiscal year 2022
through fiscal year 2027 timeframe. The Director would be
required to submit a report on the results of that analysis not
later than March 1, 2022, to the congressional defense
committees.
The committee recognizes that the rapid deployment of next-
generation maritime radar systems will be required to address
existing and emerging gaps in integrated air and missile
defense. To that end, the Navy intends to equip all new DDG-51
destroyers and the DDG-X Large Surface Combatant with the AN/
SPY-6 Air and Missile Defense Radar. The AN/SPY-7 was chosen by
the Missile Defense Agency to be the radar for Aegis Ashore
applications.
The committee supports efforts to leverage commonality
among weapons systems and believes additional opportunities may
be available to employ this approach in modernizing Aegis
weapons systems aboard existing surface ships as well as in
Aegis Ashore applications. Employing common radar systems could
reduce risk and lower life cycle costs for the Department of
Defense.
To clarify the options, the provision would require CAPE to
analyze the costs and capabilities of the current radars
supporting Aegis combat systems.
Extension of report on Littoral Combat Ship mission packages (sec. 133)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend an
annual report on Littoral Combat Ship mission packages through
the fiscal year 2027 budget request.
Extension of procurement authorities for certain amphibious
shipbuilding programs (sec. 134)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
procurement authorities for certain amphibious shipbuilding
programs to include fiscal year 2022.
Limitation on decommissioning or inactivating a battle force ship
before the end of expected service life (sec. 135)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the decommissioning or inactivation of a battle force ship
before the end of such ship's expected service. The provision
would allow the Secretary of the Navy to waive this prohibition
if certain conditions are met.
Acquisition, modernization, and sustainment plan for carrier air wings
(sec. 136)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Navy to develop a 15-year acquisition, modernization, and
sustainment plan for the entire carrier air wing (CVW),
building off the requirement in the William M. (Mac) Thornberry
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public
Law 116-283) to produce a fighter force structure acquisition
strategy. The provision would require the Secretary of the Navy
to provide the plan to the congressional defense committees not
later than February 1, 2022.
In order to meet the challenges of great power competition,
the Navy's carrier air wings must have the right capabilities
and sufficient aircraft inventories. Although smaller scale
efforts have looked at components of the CVW, such as fighter
force structure, a comprehensive plan based on current and
projected requirements is necessary to maintain U.S. naval air
superiority. The plan should:
(1) Assess how well CVW capabilities and composition
meet National Defense Strategy requirements, and plan
to address known shortfalls such as tanker capacity and
strike fighter range;
(2) Identify the role of autonomous aircraft in
future CVWs, to include the MQ-25 but also consider
other potential future capabilities and platforms;
(3) Assess whether nine CVWs is the correct force
structure;
(4) Consider whether the current composition of
aircraft and squadrons within a CVW is adequate;
(5) Consider whether 10 CVWs, the current legal
requirement to be achieved by October 1, 2025, under
section 8062 of title 10, United States Code, is
adequate; and
(6) Identify the appropriate modernization plan to
maximize operational use of current platforms,
particularly the EA-18G and E-2D, by leveraging
available technologies such as the Next Generation
Jammer.
Improving oversight of Navy contracts for shipbuilding, conversion, and
repair (sec. 137)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
establishment of the position of Deputy Commander of the Naval
Sea Systems Command for the Supervision of Shipbuilding,
Conversion, and Repair. The provision would also specify the
duties of the Deputy Commander.
Subtitle D--Air Force Programs
Required minimum inventory of tactical airlift aircraft (sec. 141)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force to maintain a total active aircraft
inventory of 292 C-130 aircraft.
Extension of inventory requirement for Air Force fighter aircraft (sec.
142)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
requirement to maintain a minimum capacity of Air Force fighter
aircraft.
Prohibition on use of funds for retirement of A-10 aircraft (sec. 143)
The committee recommends a provision that would prevent the
Secretary of the Air Force from retiring A-10 aircraft during
fiscal year 2022, and would add specific information that would
be required in the report on the comparison of A-10 and F-35
aircraft in the close air support mission.
The provision would also require the Secretary of the Air
Force, not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment
of this Act, to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees on plans to review and maintain the current fleet of
A-10 aircraft at sufficient levels of readiness.
Furthermore, the provision would modify an existing
required report on close air support capabilities to include
the design of the test plan and metrics, along with details of
execution including scenarios examined, number of sorties, time
on station, and how the impact to ground forces was assessed.
The committee is concerned that the Air Force may seek to
proceed with divestment of additional A-10 aircraft before
congressionally-directed, statutorily-required analyses have
been completed or provided to the congressional defense
committees. In fact, the budget request included a proposal to
retire 42 A-10 aircraft in fiscal year 2022. Due to delays in
the operational testing of the F-35 aircraft, a required
comparative analysis of the A-10 and the F-35 for the close air
support mission has not been conducted. As a result, the
Congress has had to rely on third party reports that have
raised concerns that required elements of the test may not be
carried out as directed.
The committee also believes that the Air Force should
communicate plans for anticipated basing decisions that would
follow retirement of any A-10 aircraft following the
comparative test on close air support, including the
anticipated timeline for adoption of any supplemental missions.
Requirements relating to reports on fighter aircraft (sec. 144)
The committee recommends a provision that would remove the
prohibition on submitting a report comparing, among other
things, close air support capabilities of A-10 and F-35
aircraft. Section 134 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) required that the
capabilities comparison be submitted with the report on initial
operational test and evaluation (IOT&E) of the F-35. However,
IOT&E for the F-35 has been delayed for reasons unrelated to
the comparison of capabilities, and the committee wants the
Department to release the report sooner than the F-35 IOT&E
report would be available.
Prohibition on additional F-35 aircraft for the Air National Guard
(sec. 145)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
further equipping of Air National Guard (ANG) units with the F-
35 until the ratio of combat-coded F-35 aircraft of the Regular
Air Force to combat-coded F-35 aircraft of the Air National
Guard is greater than four to one.
The committee supports the total force approach of the U.S.
Air Force, but is concerned that the current mobility dwell
times for the ANG potentially restrict availability of F-35
aircraft for deployments to support combatant commander
requirements. The ANG plays an extremely important role as a
force in readiness and as a reserve. However, as F-35s have
been fielded, a disproportionate share have been fielded to the
Air reserve components, and mobility dwell limits for such
units create an imbalance in force generation capability.
Prohibition on availability of funds for reducing the number of KC-135
aircraft of the Air National Guard designated as primary
mission aircraft inventory (sec. 146)
The committee recommends a provision that would prevent the
Air Force from reducing the number of KC-135 Air National Guard
aircraft designated as primary mission aircraft inventory in
fiscal year 2022. With the KC-46 behind schedule and unable to
perform the full range of refueling missions, the committee
believes that it would be unwise to place any additional Air
National Guard KC-135 aerial refueling assets in backup status.
Authority to divest 18 KC-135 aircraft (sec. 147)
The committee recommends a provision that would allow the
Secretary of the Air Force to divest 18 KC-135 tankers during
fiscal year 2022.
Prohibition on use of funds for a follow-on tanker aircraft to the KC-
46 aircraft (sec. 148)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Air Force from spending any funds for a follow-on tanker to
the KC-46, the so-called Bridge Tanker, until the Remote Vision
System version 2.0 has begun operational testing.
Maintenance of B-1 bomber aircraft squadrons (sec. 149)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
further reductions in B-1 bombers until such time as the B-21
aircraft begins fielding.
Subtitle E--Defense--Wide, Joint, and Multiservice Matters
Prohibition on duplication of efforts to provide air- and space-based
ground moving target indicator capability (sec. 161)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the duplication of effort across multiple programs to provide
air- and space-based ground moving target indicator capability
across multiple services and agencies until the Vice Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in consultation with the
Secretaries of the military departments and applicable agency
heads, provides to congressional defense committees a list of
all procurement and research and development efforts funded
with Department of Defense or other executive agency resources,
as well as how those efforts will provide real-time information
to the warfighter through the Joint All Domain Command and
Control efforts of the Department.
Limitation on funds for Armed Overwatch aircraft (sec. 162)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the obligation or expenditure of funds authorized by this Act
for the procurement of Armed Overwatch aircraft by U.S. Special
Operations Command (SOCOM) in Procurement, Defense-wide, until
15 days after the submission of the airborne intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance acquisition roadmap required
by section 165(a) of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-
283).
Additionally, the committee directs the Director, Cost
Assessment and Program Evaluation, to review SOCOM's Armed
Overwatch program and submit an independent assessment to the
congressional defense committees at the same time as the
submission of the President's budget request for fiscal year
2023. At a minimum, the independent assessment shall evaluate
the total number of Armed Overwatch aircraft necessary to
fulfill the requirements of special operations forces in light
of changes to global force posture and increasing threats to
manned aircraft since the requirement for such aircraft was
validated by the SOCOM Commander.
Transition of F-35 program sustainment from Joint Program Office to Air
Force and Navy (sec. 163)
The committee recommends a provision that would require a
transition over five years from the Joint Program Office-
managed sustainment effort to a service-led effort with the
U.S. Air Force as the executive agent for F-35As and the U.S.
Navy as the executive agent for F-35Bs and F-35Cs. The
provision would require the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment, in consultation with the
Secretaries of the Air Force and the Navy, to provide a
transition plan to the congressional defense committees not
later than February 1, 2022, that would fully transition
sustainment responsibilities to the respective services not
later than October 1, 2027.
Budget Items
Army
Army unfunded requirements
In accordance with section 222a of title 10, United States
Code, the Chief of Staff of the Army submitted a list of
unfunded requirements. The committee recommends an additional
increase of $1.4 billion for items on this unfunded
requirements list.
CH-47 Cargo Aircraft modifications
The budget request included $9.9 million in line number 20
of Aircraft Procurement, Army (APA) for CH-47 Cargo Helicopter
Mods.
The committee recognizes that retrofit of already fielded
CH-47 cargo aircraft with Improved Vibration Control System
(IVCS) improves mission performance and endurance by reducing
vibration wear and crew fatigue. IVCS is installed in new CH-47
at the aircraft manufacturing plant.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in
line number 20 of APA to facilitate IVCS retrofit in already
fielded CH-47 aircraft.
Paladin Integrated Management
The budget request included $446.4 million in line number 8
of Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles (WTCV)
for Paladin Integrated Management (PIM).
The committee recognizes the critical importance of
modernizing the Paladin as the Army's only armored self-
propelled howitzer within Armored Brigade Combat Teams.
Returning to a higher programmed production rate and quantity
permits the Army to stay on schedule to field two battalions
per year, avoiding a 17 percent per-unit cost increase that
imposes a penalty of nearly $50.0 million due to the reduced
fiscal year 2022 budget request quantities. The PIM is also on
the Chief of Staff of the Army's unfunded requirements list.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $199.5
million in line number 8 of WTCV for Paladin Integrated
Management.
Multi-Domain Task Force All-Domain Operations Center cloud pilot
The budget request included $140.0 million in line number
22 of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for the Signal
Modernization Program.
The committee supports rapid establishment of the Army
Multi-Domain Task Force (MDTF) and recognizes the importance of
secure, deployable computing resources to enable multi-domain
operations. The Chief of Staff of the Army submitted an
unfunded requirement of $2.5 million for an MDTF All-Domain
Operations Center (ADOC) cloud pilot.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5
million in line number 22 of OPA for an MDTF ADOC cloud pilot.
Integrated Visual Augmentation System
The budget request included $1.1 billion in line number 83
of Other Procurement, Army (OPA) for Night Vision Devices,
including the Integrated Visual Augmentation System (IVAS).
The committee recognizes the importance of IVAS and
supports expeditious initial fielding of this advanced
capability to close combat soldiers but is concerned about the
projected level of system development and ensuring iterative
improvements between initial and full fielding. The committee
believes that completion of robust operational testing and
implementation of iterative improvements are warranted before
proceeding to the production rate the Army is seeking in fiscal
2022.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $269.8
million in line number 83 of OPA for the Integrated Visual
Augmentation System Heads Up Display.
Man-portable radiation detection systems
The budget request included $55.6 million in line number
120 of Other Procurement, Army (OPA) for CBRN [chemical,
biological, radiological and nuclear] Defense.
The committee notes that the Army National Guard is
requesting an additional 15 man-portable radiation detection
systems for use by the Army National Guard Civil Support Teams
as an unfunded requirement.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $11.3
million in line number 120 of OPA for CBRN Defense.
Expeditionary Solid Waste Disposal System
The budget request included $32.4 million in line number
176 of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for Other Support
Equipment for modification of in-service equipment (OPA-3).
The committee concurs with the Army's budget justification
documents, which stated that the Expeditionary Solid Waste
Disposal System (ESWDS) ``will reduce the use of burn pits by
providing an environmentally responsible solution for onsite
disposal of 1,000 pounds of solid waste per day. The ESWDS will
also reduce Soldier, civilian, and local population exposure to
pollutants from open air burn pits; reduce the amount of trash
that must be backhauled, reducing Soldiers' exposure and
attacks during convoy operations; reduce the waste held onsite
[which] also deters potential vermin that could spread disease
and disrupt mission[;] and eliminate the security risk from
uncontrolled access to trash.'' However, despite this
justification, the Army requested no funds for ESWDS. The
committee notes that ESWDS could also provide a capability
during pandemics to rapidly incinerate contaminated personal
protective equipment, thereby decreasing exposure to
servicemembers.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $15.9
million in line number 176 of OPA for ESWDS in OPA-3.
Infantry Squad Vehicle
The budget request included $29.8 million in line number 5
of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for Infantry Squad Vehicles
(ISV).
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in
line number 5 of OPA for ISV.
Navy
Navy and Marine Corps unfunded requirements
In accordance with section 222a of title 10, United States
Code, the Chief of Naval Operations and the Commandant of the
Marine Corps each submitted a list of unfunded requirements.
The committee recommends an additional increase of about $32.6
million for items on these unfunded requirements lists.
CH-53K
The budget request included $1.3 billion in line number 7
of Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for procurement of CH-53K
helicopters.
The Marine Corps' CH-53K King Stallion helicopter will
replace the CH-53E. The CH-53K has been designed to improve
aircraft, aircrew, and passenger survivability; increase
reliability and maintainability; and significantly reduce
operating and support costs. The committee believes that the
CH-53K will play an important role in supporting expeditionary
advanced base operations in a high-end, maritime fight in the
Pacific.
After a restructuring of the development program to allow
time to correct problems identified in development testing, the
CH-53K has demonstrated the potential to meet or exceed all Key
Performance Parameters. The program achieved Milestone C in
April 2017 and is in low rate initial production (LRIP), with
27 aircraft in various stages of production. Initial
Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E) should begin soon, to
support the first deployment expected in 2023-2024.
Decades of sustained combat operations and high operational
tempo have left the legacy fleet of CH-53Es at alarmingly low
readiness levels, which compromises the Marine Corps' ability
to meet the demands of the National Defense Strategy. The
committee recognizes that acceleration in the CH-53K production
ramp would be necessary to decrease flyaway cost and stabilize
the industrial base.
The committee looks forward to successful completion of
IOT&E and encourages the Marine Corps to maintain a dedicated
test capability that will allow for meeting the current Initial
Operational Capability schedule as well as consider an increase
in yearly production rates for future years.
The Marine Corps reduced the planned buy for fiscal year
2022 from 11 to 9. Maintaining a predictable, stable, and
growing production ramp is critical to ensuring suppliers are
incentivized to reduce costs and keep parts production timely
with the single biggest driver to reduce cost being aircraft
volume. In addition, readiness rates, which are currently about
65 percent for the legacy CH-53E fleet, will improve
dramatically with the deployment of CH-53K aircraft. The Marine
Corps needs this heavy lift capability delivered to the
warfighter sooner rather than later.
In the meantime, anticipating a successful result from
IOT&E, the committee recommends an increase of $250.0 million
to purchase two additional CH-53K helicopters.
MQ-4 Triton
The budget request included $160.2 million in line number
21 of Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for procurement of MQ-4
Triton.
This reflects a production pause in fiscal year 2022 of the
MQ-4C Triton unmanned air system (UAS) and re-starting
procurement of multi-intelligence-configured aircraft in fiscal
year 2023. The MQ-4C Triton UAS is integral to recapitalizing
the Navy's maritime patrol and reconnaissance force, providing
a persistent maritime and littoral intelligence, surveillance,
and reconnaissance data collection and dissemination capability
to the fleet.
The committee believes that a production pause in the
Triton program risks breaking the production line and incurring
significant cost increases in the program.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $323.0
million to purchase two MQ-4 Triton UAS.
Submarine industrial base development
The budget request included $1.6 billion in line number 2
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for advance
procurement for the Columbia-class submarine program.
The nuclear shipbuilding industrial base continues to
struggle to support the increased demand associated with the
Navy's future shipbuilding plan. This presents significant risk
to the Columbia-class submarine, the Virginia-class submarine
with Virginia Payload Module, and aircraft carrier programs. It
is critical to further develop existing industrial capacity and
qualify new suppliers now, in advance of the increased demand.
The committee believes additional funding is needed to
increase capacity, qualify new suppliers, add resiliency and
create competition for critical components, and identify points
in the supply chain where shortfalls exist.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $130.0
million in line number 2 of SCN for submarine industrial base
supplier development efforts.
Arleigh Burke-class destroyers
The budget request included $2.0 billion in line number 10
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN) for procurement of
Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.
The committee notes that funding a second Arleigh Burke-
class destroyer in fiscal year 2022 is the Chief of Naval
Operations' top unfunded priority, supports completing a multi-
ship procurement contract, and increases Flight III destroyer
multi-mission capability and capacity in the most demanding
warfighting scenario.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $1.7
billion for an additional Arleigh Burke-class destroyer in line
number 10 of SCN.
Arleigh Burke-class advance procurement
The budget request did not include funding in line number
11 of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN) for advance
procurement of Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.
The committee notes the Navy intends to negotiate another
Arleigh Burke-class multiyear procurement contract that would
support Arleigh Burke-class procurement in future years. The
committee believes procuring a third Arleigh Burke-class
destroyer in fiscal year 2023 would provide additional
warfighting capacity as well as greater stability in the
shipbuilding industrial base.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $125.0
million in line number 11 of SCN for advance procurement of
Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.
Surface combatant supplier development
The budget request did not include funding in line number
11 of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN) for advance
procurement for the DDG-51 destroyer program.
The committee notes that elements of the surface combatant
industrial base continue to struggle to support the demands of
the Navy's future shipbuilding plan.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $50.0
million in line number 11 of SCN for surface combatant supplier
development efforts.
LPD Flight II advance procurement
The budget request included no funding in line number 16 of
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN) for LPD Flight II
advance procurement.
The committee notes that additional funding could be used
to maximize the benefit of amphibious multi-ship procurement
authorities or procure long lead time material for LPD-32.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $250.0
million in line number 16 of SCN.
LHA replacement
The budget request included $68.6 million in line number 19
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN) for the LHA
replacement amphibious assault ship.
The committee notes that efficiencies could be gained by
accelerating the construction of LHA-9, including steadier
workflow with an improved learning curve, more predictable
delivery contracts for material and equipment suppliers, and a
more effective continuous improvement schedule.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $350.0
million in line number 19 of SCN for the LHA replacement.
Expeditionary fast transport vessels
The budget request included no funding in line number 20 of
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for expeditionary fast
transport (EPF) vessels.
The committee notes that EPF vessels are built with an
inherent cargo handling capability and ability to deliver
troops and equipment together in a manner that provides greater
flexibility in how combatant commanders employ these and other
naval vessels in theater.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $270.0
million in line number 20 of SCN.
Used sealift ships
The budget request included $299.9 million in line number
30 of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN) to purchase five
used vessels to recapitalize the Ready Reserve Force (RRF).
The committee notes that the Congress provided funding for
two vessels in fiscal year 2021 and that the Navy has been
unable to successfully contract for those ships. The committee
will need to see the Navy execute the fiscal year 2021 funds
and the vessels in question inducted into the RRF before it can
recommend additional funding for this program.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $299.9
million in line number 30 of SCN.
Sonobuoys
The budget request included $249.1 million in line number
94 of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN) for the procurement of
sonobuoys.
The committee notes that the Chief of Naval Operations
requested the procurement of additional sonobuoys as a fiscal
year 2022 unfunded priority.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $54.4
million in line number 94 of OPN.
Ground-launched anti-ship missiles
The budget request included $67.5 million in line number 5
of Procurement, Marine Corps (PMC) Artillery Weapons System.
The committee recognizes the need to build the missile
inventory in support of Marine Corps ground-launched anti-ship
capability requirements and notes that the Commandant of the
Marine Corps listed this ground-based anti-ship requirement as
his top unfunded priority.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $57.8
million in line number 5 of PMC for ground-launched anti-ship
missiles.
Ground-launched long range fires
The budget request included $67.5 million in line number 5
of Procurement, Marine Corps (PMC) for Artillery Weapons
System.
The committee recognizes the need to build missile
inventory in support of Marine Corps ground-launched long-range
fires requirements and notes that the Commandant of the Marine
Corps submitted this long-range fires capability as a top
requirement on his unfunded priority list.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $96.0
million in line number 5 of PMC for Long Range Fires.
Air Force
Air Force and Space Force unfunded requirements
In accordance with section 222a of title 10, United States
Code, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force and the Chief of
Space Operations each submitted a list of unfunded
requirements. The committee recommends an additional increase
of about $1.2 billion for items on this unfunded requirements
list.
F-35 power modules
The budget request included $4.2 billion in line number 2
of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for F-35A
procurement.
The committee agrees with the Air Force request for
additional power modules for the F135 engine as requested on
the unfunded priorities list submitted by the Chief of Staff of
the Air Force.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $175
million in line number 2 of APAF for the purchase 20 F135 power
modules.
F-35A
The budget request included $4.2 billion in line number 2
of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF) for F-35A
procurement.
The committee is concerned that, after repeated
congressional plus-ups and support for increased production,
the Air Force still budgets for a quantity below the stated
production objectives of the F-35 program. Further, the
committee is concerned that the Air Force has squandered an
opportunity to capitalize on advanced procurement
appropriations by only budgeting for 48 aircraft this year
instead of the 60 aircraft that were planned and that the
advanced procurement was previously provided for by the
Congress. The committee expects the Department to execute
proper forecasting and propose appropriate budget requests
rather than to continue to rely on congressional plus-ups.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $85.0
million in line number 2 of APAF for the purchase of an
additional F-35A.
MH-139A
The budget request did not include funding in Aircraft
Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for the MH-139 utility
helicopter program. The MH-139A program will replace the Air
Force fleet of 63 UH-1N aircraft that have significant
capability gaps in the areas of speed, range, endurance,
payload capacity, and aircraft self-protection. This program is
an element of the Air Force's nuclear enterprise reform
initiatives.
The Air Force is not requesting to buy any helicopters in
fiscal year 2022 since the MH-139A has not completed
operational testing or Federal Aviation Administration
certifications. However, the committee believes that there may
be ways of accelerating the program, and, given the critical
nature of the program, believes additional resources should be
made available to the Air Force for this purpose.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $75.0
million in line 12 of APAF for the MH-139A program.
MQ-9
The budget request included $3.3 million in line number 21
of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for procurement of
MQ-9 Reapers.
The MQ-9 Reaper is a critical component of efforts to fill
current intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR)
requirements. Last year, the Commander, U.S. Central Command,
included additional MQ-9 funding at the top of his unfunded
priorities list. In April 2021, the commander told the
committee of the importance of the MQ-9 and his need for more
of them. The Air Force today still lacks the ISR capacity to
meet combatant commanders' requirements contained in the 2018
National Defense Strategy. Despite this, the Department of
Defense has proposed stopping production of this platform,
without a program of record to replace it.
In fiscal year 2022, both the Commander, U.S. Southern
Command, and Commander, U.S. Africa Command, included
additional ISR capabilities in their unfunded priorities list.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $100.0
million to buy up to 5 MQ-9 Reapers in fiscal year 2022.
B-52 training system
The budget request included $75.0 million in line number 25
of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF) for B-52
modernization.
The committee recognizes the importance of the Air Force's
efforts to modernize its bomber fleet and keep training systems
compatible with operational aircraft.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million in line number 25 of APAF for the procurement of
updated training equipment.
F-35 modifications
The budget request included $304.1 million in line number
33 of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for F-35
modifications.
The committee believes that the 338 F-35 aircraft purchased
by the Air Force in Lots 1-13 need to be upgraded expeditiously
to the Block 4 configuration with the technology refresh 3
hardware.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $1.7
billion in line number 33 of APAF for F-35 modifications.
F-16 AESA radars
The budget request included $613.2 million in line number
31 of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF) for F-16
modernization.
The committee recognizes the importance of the Air Force's
efforts to modernize its fourth generation fighter fleet and
equip itself with the most advanced and capable radars in
support of the National Defense Strategy. The committee is
concerned about the quantity and timing of procurement of
advanced radars for the entire F-16 fleet.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0
million in line number 31 of APAF for the procurement of
additional radar sets across the entire F-16 fleet.
Intercontinental Ballistic Missile fuze realignment of funds
The budget request included $47.8 million in line number 16
of Missile Procurement, Air Force (MPAF), for Intercontinental
Ballistic Missile (ICBM) Fuze Modernization Advance
Procurement.
The committee has been informed that updated program
estimates require regular procurement instead of advance
procurement.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $12.3
million in line number 16 of MPAF and an increase of $12.3
million in line number 15 of MPAF, for ICBM Fuze Modernization.
Long Duration Propulsive National Security Space Launch Secondary
Payload Adapter Demonstration
The budget request included $3.3 million in line number 5
of Procurement, Space Force (PSF), for General Information
Tech--Space.
The committee notes the critical importance of a second
geostationary earth orbit antenna for Long Duration Propulsive
National Security Space Launch Secondary Payload Adapter
mission Tetra and follow on Rapid On-Orbit Space Technology and
Evaluation Ring missions; this is also a Space Force unfunded
requirement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0
million in line number 5 of PSF for a secondary payload adapter
demonstration.
Radio equipment
The budget request included $14.2 million in line number 49
of Other Procurement, Air Force (OPAF), for Radio Equipment.
The committee recognizes the importance of the Department
of the Air Force's modernization efforts with respect to
communications and supports the Space Force's unfunded
requirement for additional funding of this capability.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $1.5
million in line number 49 of OPAF for Radio Equipment.
Defense Wide
Defense-wide Procurement unfunded requirements
In accordance with section 222a of title 10, United States
Code, the service chiefs and combatant commanders each
submitted a list of unfunded requirements. The committee
recommends an additional increase of $298.1 million for
Defense-wide Procurement items on these unfunded requirements
lists.
Combat diving advanced equipment acceleration
The budget request included $17.2 million in line number 66
of Procurement, Defense-wide (PDW), for U.S. Special Operations
Command (SOCOM) Underwater Systems.
The committee supports prioritization of resources to
address capability gaps, particularly those that ensure U.S.
Special Operations Forces maintain superiority relative to near
peer competitors and notes that the SOCOM Commander has
identified the acceleration of combat diving advanced equipment
as an unfunded requirement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.2
million in line 66 of PDW, to accelerate fielding of combat
diving advanced equipment.
Modernized forward-look sonar
The budget request included $17.2 million in line number 66
of Procurement, Defense-wide (PDW), for U.S. Special Operations
Command (SOCOM) Underwater Systems.
The committee supports prioritization of resources to
address capability gaps, particularly those that ensure U.S.
Special Operations Forces maintain superiority relative to near
peer competitors, and notes that the SOCOM Commander has
identified modernized forward look sonar as an unfunded
requirement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $900,000
in line number 66 of PDW for the fielding of modernized
forward-look sonar.
Fused panoramic night vision goggles acceleration
The budget request included $328.6 million in line number
78 of Procurement, Defense-Wide (PDW) for U.S. Special
Operations Command (SOCOM) Operational Enhancements.
The committee supports prioritization of resources to
address capability gaps, particularly those that ensure U.S.
Special Operations Forces maintain superiority relative to
near-peer competitors, and notes that the SOCOM Commander has
identified the accelerated fielding of fused panoramic night
vision goggles as an unfunded requirement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $28.0
million in line number 78 of PDW for the accelerated fielding
of fused panoramic night vision goggles by SOCOM.
Items of Special Interest
Constellation-class frigate program
The committee expects that the new Constellation-class
guided missile frigate (FFG-62) will have an important role in
the Navy battle force. While the Navy required that offerors
base their proposals on an existing hull design and mature
technologies, concerns about this new ship class remain,
including typical first-in-class design and production
challenges. These concerns contributed to the enactment of
section 125 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283)
that required the Navy to implement a land-based testing
program to reduce the technical risk of key engineering and
electrical systems. Given the historical performance of the
Navy and industry with the construction of early ships in new
ship classes, the committee believes that the FFG-62 program
could benefit from additional risk reduction efforts for other
critical subsystems to further reduce technical risk prior to
the delivery of FFG-62.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to submit a report to the congressional defense committees
with the submission of the fiscal year 2023 budget request on
how the Navy will expand risk reduction efforts to other
aspects of the frigate program to address first-in-class
construction challenges and increase confidence that ships in
the class after FFG-62 will achieve the required capability
upon delivery, on budget, and on schedule.
San Antonio-class lethality and survivability upgrades
The committee understands the Navy and Marine Corps are
reviewing lethality and survivability upgrades for San Antonio-
class amphibious ships to support Expeditionary Advanced Base
Operations and Distributed Maritime Operations.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to submit,
not later than February 1, 2022, a report to the congressional
defense committees that describes courses of action to upgrade
the sensors, weapons, and combat systems on current and future
San Antonio-class ships.
This report shall, at a minimum, evaluate the cost,
schedule, and operational benefits of:
(1) Upgrading the SPY-6(V)2 Enterprise Air
Surveillance Radar (EASR) rotating radar to the SPY-
6(V)3 fixed-face EASR to better support: (a) air
traffic control; (b) air and missile defense-in-depth
for forces operating at sea; (c) air and missile
defense for forces operating ashore within radar range;
and (d) other offensive and defensive engagements;
(2) Integrating at least a 16-cell Mark-41 Vertical
Launch System (VLS); and
(3) Integrating the EASR and Mark-41 VLS options
identified in (1) and (2) with versions of the Tomahawk
Weapon Control System, Ship Self-Defense System,
Cooperative Engagement Capability including the variant
currently fielded on San Antonio-class ships, and Aegis
Combat System.
Based on the courses of action evaluated, the Secretary
shall identify the optimal approach in terms of cost, schedule,
and operational benefits for upgrading the sensors, weapons,
and combat system on current and future San Antonio-class
ships.
``Digital Engineering'' capabilities
The committee supports the Air Force's continued
development of its advanced manufacturing techniques and
processes to reduce the cost and time needed to develop and
sustain new weapon systems. The committee is aware of the
positive impact of Air Force use of e-Design ``digital
engineering'' initiatives utilized on the T-7A, the B-21, the
Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) program and Ground Based
Strategic Deterrence (GBSD) program. The committee believes e-
Design and advanced manufacturing processes and techniques
could allow the Air Force to test and innovate using the
digital environment, increasing speed and agility.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a report not later than February 15, 2022, to
the congressional defense committees on the Air Force's ability
to expand digital engineering capabilities to a wide range of
aircraft programs, high-cost structural parts, systems, and
subsystems, as well as how the Air Force plans to securely and
effectively interchange data with operating locations to enable
the local implementation of advanced manufacturing and
sustainment operations. The committee also directs the
Secretary of the Air Force to address how the Air Force plans
to acquire, manage, and perform configuration control on
intellectual property and data rights needed to fully
capitalize on the benefits of digital engineering while driving
down total life cycle costs.
Additional applications of unmanned technology
The National Defense Strategy identified modernization of
the current fleet of vehicles and aircraft as a major priority
for the United States to gain the technological edge over near-
peer adversaries. As the Department of Defense continues to
identify areas of cost-savings throughout its budget,
evaluating and expanding existing programs that have proven to
be successful would reduce the costs and risks associated with
developing and fielding new technologies. Focusing on one
specific avenue of modernization efforts, it will be imperative
for the Department to evaluate domestic, proven technologies
currently being fielded to modernize and expand vehicle and
aircraft capabilities. The Department should consider the
potential for upgrading existing vehicles and aircraft with
autonomous capability. Fielding such capability could have
operational advantages and yield potential savings in personnel
costs. However, the committee is aware that such advantages are
not present in every case, and notes that the Air Force is
proposing to shift from unmanned capability in the Battlefield
Airborne Communications Node (BACN) program to manned aircraft.
The committee believes that the Department of Defense
should develop a template for engaging with the private sector,
including with small businesses, for collaborating on potential
upgrades for existing platforms with autonomous capability.
Such collaboration could yield savings, while reducing
burdensome requirements in expanding and modernizing overall
capabilities. Applying unmanned capability could also extend
the life cycle of current airframes.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to develop criteria and a template for evaluating potential use
of commercial autonomous capability with existing vehicles and
aircraft and to provide a report on the development of the same
to the congressional defense committees with the budget request
for fiscal year 2023. Such a template shall address potential
costs and benefits of fielding such capabilities, and consider
potential limitations of commercial systems to include: (1)
Military requirements to operate outside of normal flight
corridors for unmanned aerial vehicles or off-road for unmanned
ground vehicles; and (2) Requirements relating to the safe
conduct of aviation operations within the National Airspace
System.
Air Force airborne electronic attack systems
Section 128 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-
283) required the Secretary of the Navy, in consultation with
the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to provide a
``strategy to ensure full spectrum electromagnetic superiority
using the ALQ-249 Next Generation Jammer.''
With renewed interest in offensive electronic attack
capability by the Air Force, and in an effort to minimize
duplicative efforts, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Air Force to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees not later than December 15, 2021, that addresses the
following: (1) The capability requirements and existing
capacity gaps of operational Air Force airborne electronic
attack systems; (2) A plan for how the Air Force will respond
to threats or shortfalls identified in (1); (3) An assessment
of the ability of the ALQ-249 Next Generation Jammer to meet
current and projected enemy threats; and (4) An evaluation of
the compatibility of the ALQ-249 Next Generation Jammer with
Air Force aircraft.
Airborne advanced training
The committee has been monitoring closely U.S. Air Force
(USAF) pilot manning shortfalls for the past several years but
remains concerned that little progress has been made addressing
the issue, especially in increasing the number of highly
skilled fighter pilots. Although initiatives such as Air
Education and Training Command's Pilot Training Next and
Undergraduate Pilot Training 2.5/3.0 leverage innovative
technologies designed to train pilots faster and to a higher
standard, they have not yet optimized innovative technologies
for inflight training operations.
The committee understands that airborne augmented reality
technology currently under evaluation by the Air Force Research
Laboratory, Air Combat Command, and Air Education and Training
Command is demonstrating great promise at addressing this
aspect of training. Further, the committee encourages the USAF
to move more rapidly in developing and adopting airborne
augmented reality technologies that contribute to improved
training outcomes, reduce net training costs, and increase
environmental sustainability.
Amphibious ship acquisition strategy
The committee believes that a block buy, multi-ship, or
multiyear procurement approach for LPD-17 Flight II-class
amphibious transport ships and LHA 10 would provide substantial
cost savings as well as needed stability and predictability for
the shipbuilder and its vendor base.
The committee notes section 124 of the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (Public Law 116-283) authorized multi-ship procurement
authority for amphibious ships, which the Navy estimated would
save 8 to 12 percent, or roughly $1.0 billion, for the multi-
ship procurement of these four ships as compared to four
separate ship procurement contracts. The committee also notes
that the Navy estimates that $4.0 billion will be saved using a
block buy acquisition strategy for the procurement of CVN-80
and CVN-81.
While the committee supports the execution of the section
124 authority as soon as possible and prefers this course of
action, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees, not
later than October 1, 2021, on the merits of pursuing a block
buy, multi-ship, or multiyear procurement acquisition strategy
for LPD-17 Flight II-class ships and LHA-10.
This report shall include a business case analysis
comparing the cost and schedule of single ship contracts with a
multiple ship contract for the following groupings: (1) LPD-32,
LPD-33, and LHA-10; (2) LPD-32, LPD-33, LPD-34, and LHA-10; and
(3) Any other groupings identified by the Secretary. This
report shall also include a description of other key
considerations that the Secretary deems appropriate.
If the business case analysis shows that pursuing a block
buy, multi-ship, or multiyear procurement strategy for LPD-17
Flight II-class ships and LHA-10 has merit, the committee
strongly encourages the Secretary to include such a proposal in
the Navy's budget request for fiscal year 2023.
Army National Guard Airborne Tactical Extraction Platform
The committee is aware that multiple State units of the
National Guard have a demonstrated need to purchase airborne
tactical rescue equipment. One such device is the Airborne
Tactical Extraction Platform (AirTEP). The committee is aware
that the Alabama Army National Guard has indicated its intent
to purchase the AirTEP with the sole purpose of performing
quicker, safer, and more efficient helicopter rescues during
natural disasters such as floods and hurricanes. The committee
also understands that the Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas,
Georgia, and Kentucky Army National Guard units have submitted
the AirTEP as their number three priority in capturing National
Guard and Reserve Equipment Account funding for fiscal year
2022.
The committee has become aware of an obstacle to the
further deployment of this device due to a delay in the U.S.
Army PM-Utility Helicopter Office (Redstone Arsenal) publishing
an Airworthiness Release (AWR). The committee understands that
the AWR process is currently going through evaluation and is
near completion but approval and publication are still pending
based on the final evaluation by System Readiness Directorate
(SRD).
The committee requests that SRD and Redstone Arsenal issue
a report to the Senate Armed Services Committee not later than
January 15, 2022, as to the anticipated timeframe for
completing the AWR process, and any technical, logistical, or
funding challenges associated with completing the AWR.
Army National Guard capabilities
The Army has chosen to accept differences between Active-
Duty unit force structure and that of the Army National Guard
(ARNG). For example, the Army has chosen to omit MQ-1C units
from ARNG combat aviation brigades (CABs). The committee needs
to understand the impact of such differences on the ability of
ARNG division headquarters to execute assigned missions and the
ability to conduct multi-domain operations.
The committee therefore directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than January 1, 2022, on how ARNG divisions will execute
multi-domain operations, and how having capabilities not
organic to the divisions will impact their ability to conduct
multi-domain operations.
Assessment of Armored Brigade Combat Team modernization
The committee notes with concern the substantially reduced
investment proposed in the budget request for fiscal year 2022
for the modernization of armored combat vehicles (ACV) that
comprise the Army's Armored Brigade Combat Teams (ABCT). The
committee is concerned about these reductions and that similar
reduced procurement quantities in future years will further
slow modernization of enduring ACVs, reduce the readiness of
ABCTs as the current vehicles age, and damage the ACV
industrial base.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to conduct an assessment of the investment strategy for
modernization of ACVs and the impact of that strategy on
modernization and readiness of ABCTs. The Secretary shall
provide a briefing of the assessment to the Senate Armed
Services Committee not later than 30 days after submission of
the President's budget request for fiscal year 2023.
The assessment and briefing shall include: (1) Procurement
quantities and funding through the future years defense
program; (2) Fielding plans through the future years defense
program; (3) A comparison to fielding plans associated with the
fiscal year 2021 budget request and future years defense
program; (4) Projected age of ACV vehicle fleets for 20 years
based on planned and projected investment and replacement; (5)
Impact of the planned procurement quantities on the ability to
meet the minimum sustainment rates of the ACV industrial base;
and (6) Any other matters the Secretary believes appropriate.
Assessment on Air National Guard F-16 self-protection capabilities
Potential adversaries around the world are proliferating
anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) capabilities, with the prospect
that they could soon exceed current F-16 capabilities to deal
with them. The Air National Guard's F-16s currently rely on
legacy expendable dispenser systems that have limited
capabilities, including an inadequate expendable decoy
capacity. This situation poses significant survivability
challenges to F-16 aircrews and the aircraft's current and
long-term combat effectiveness.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees, not later than February 15, 2022, on the Air
National Guard's F-16 self-protection capabilities against
existing and projected surface-to-air and air-to-air weapons.
The report shall cover existing F-16 defensive systems
capabilities; self-protection system requirements to defeat or
mitigate current and future threats; and a schedule of planned
testing and fielding of potential advanced expendable dispenser
systems that could be easily integrated into Air National Guard
F-16s with no impact on aircraft performance or weapons payload
capacity.
Auxiliary power units for Army ground vehicles
The committee understands that the Army is currently
exploring innovative small form factor auxiliary power units
(APUs) for use on Army ground vehicles. The committee
understands that the APUs under development present significant
improvements in size, weight, and fuel efficiency compared to
other APU and power generation solutions currently available to
the Department.
The committee commends the Army for pursuing this
capability, particularly given the growing power demands
associated with the systems, sensors, and weapons being
introduced to the ground vehicle fleet. The committee
understands that many ground vehicles have difficulty
generating the power necessary to support installed payloads.
For example, according to a June 8, 2021, report from the
Congressional Research Service, titled ``The Army's Optionally
Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV) Program: Background and Issues
for Congress'' (R45519), M2 Bradley vehicles deployed in Iraq
routinely had to turn off certain electronic systems to gain
enough power to employ their anti-roadside-bomb jammers. The
committee strongly encourages the Army to continue to pursue
new APUs to supplement existing on board vehicle power.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services
Committee by January 31, 2022, on efforts to develop and field
small form factor APUs for use on ground vehicles. This report
shall include, at a minimum: an overview of current research
and development efforts relating to small form factor auxiliary
power units for Army ground vehicles; an assessment of which
vehicle platforms stand to benefit the most from APUs currently
in development; and any plans to field new APUs on Army ground
vehicles.
Aviation defense equipment report
The committee remains supportive of the procurement of
longer range firearms for inclusion in the survival kits for
combat aviators. However, the committee is concerned that,
given the speed with which the Air Force pursued this program,
cheaper and potentially more effective options may have been
overlooked. Therefore the committee directs the Chief of Staff
of the Air Force, not later than February 1, 2022, to provide a
report to the congressional defense committees on the various
commercial firearms that might meet the requirements of the
current GAU-5A at a lower cost.
Brief on mixed-oxidant electrolytic disinfectant generator water
purification
The committee notes the effective deployment of mixed-
oxidant electrolytic disinfectant generator water purification
(MEDG) to replace bromination for water purification on U.S.
Navy large-deck ship classes for nearly 20 years.
The committee is interested in understanding whether broad
application of MEDG technology would be worth the investment.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to
provide a briefing, not later than April 15, 2022, to the
congressional defense committees on the Navy's assessment of
the costs and benefits of using MEDG technology on small- and
medium-sized ships. The briefing shall also include an
assessment of the water purification strategy for the
Constitution-class frigate (FFG-62) program.
Briefing on munitions procurement, stockage and industrial base
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army, as the
Department of Defense executive agent for ammunition and
explosives, to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services
Committee not later than 30 days after submission of the
President's budget request for fiscal year 2023. The committee
notes with concern the significant reduction in munitions
procurement quantities proposed in the President's budget
request for fiscal year 2022. The committee is concerned about
these reductions and that similar reduced procurement
quantities in future years will further negatively impact
ammunition wartime stocks, reduce the availability of
ammunition for training, and damage the ammunition industrial
base.
The briefing shall contain an assessment of the impact of
proposed munitions quantities requested in the fiscal year 2023
budget request on required wartime stocks, availability of
ammunition to conduct required training, and health of the
defense organic ammunition industrial base. For purposes of the
assessment and briefing, ``munitions'' shall include ammunition
and missiles procured by the Department of the Army for itself
or other entities within the Department of Defense.
CH-47F Block II funding restoration
The committee is concerned by significant reductions to
funding for procurement of enduring Army aircraft in the fiscal
year 2022 budget request, and the impact that these reductions
will have on Army aviation readiness, modernization, pilot and
crew safety, and the helicopter industrial base. The committee
appreciates that difficult choices were required of the Office
of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and Department of the Army
due to budget priorities and constraints, but notes that the
request for the CH-47F Block II Chinook helicopter program is
inconsistent with the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021
(Public Law 116-260) and Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020
(Public Law 116-93) with respect to expectations for the
program.
The Chief of Staff of the Army has previously certified the
need for this capability and identified CH-47F Block II funding
on the Army's unfunded priorities list for fiscal year 2022.
Given the importance of the Chinook as the Army's only medium-
lift capability, the committee expects OSD to fund the CH-47F
Block II program in the fiscal year 2023 budget request and
future years defense program.
DDG(X) acquisition strategy
The committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to implement
an acquisition strategy for the next Large Surface Combatant,
known as DDG(X), based on a collaborative design, development,
and production approach between the Government and industry.
The committee notes many recent Navy shipbuilding programs,
including the DDG 1000 and Littoral Combat Ship programs,
experienced significant cost increases, program delays, and
reliability issues due to flaws in the earliest acquisition
strategies.
Accordingly, the committee believes it is critical that the
Navy work closely with industry to ensure appropriate design
and technical maturity in developing lead ship acquisition
strategies. The committee further believes that the DDG(X)
acquisition strategy should be modeled on and leverage the best
practices of the Columbia-class Integrated Product and Process
Development (IPPD) contract with integrated lines of effort in
design, technology maturation, and construction. Furthermore,
the committee views the technology maturation initiatives
contained in section 124 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) as key elements in
the DDG(X) acquisition strategy.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to submit a
report to the congressional defense committees with the fiscal
year 2023 budget request that describes the extent to which the
Navy will utilize an IPPD-type acquisition strategy for the
DDG(X) program. This report shall describe the following lines
of effort and how they will be integrated from fiscal year 2023
through fiscal year 2040: (1) Ship design, including concept,
preliminary, and detailed; (2) Hull form design and selection;
(3) Combat systems, including lessons learned from DDG-125
Combat Systems Ship's Qualification Trials; (4) Hull,
mechanical and electrical systems, including the land-based
testing required under section 131 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020; and (5) Construction,
including the transition from production of the Flight III DDG-
51 program to the DDG(X) program.
DDG-51 destroyer multi-year procurement
The committee continues to support the national policy of
achieving at least a 355-ship fleet, as codified in the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public
Law 115-91), which is integral to the National Defense Strategy
and its emphasis on near-peer competition with Russia and
China.
The committee views DDG-51 destroyers as the backbone of
the surface fleet, providing multi-mission flexibility and
increasing capability with introduction of Flight III and the
AN/SPY-6 radar. With plans for construction of a new class of
Large Surface Combatants (LSCs) toward the end of this decade
and the current multi-year procurement of DDG-51s ending in
fiscal year 2022, the committee believes that it is imperative
that the Navy award another DDG-51 multi-year contract
beginning in fiscal year 2023. This contract is critical to
ensuring that Flight III capability continues to be delivered
to the fleet and the industrial base is maintained to support
the LSC acquisition strategy.
Accordingly, the committee urges the Secretary of Defense
and the Secretary of the Navy to make all necessary plans to
award another multi-year contract for DDG-51 Flight III
destroyers in fiscal year 2023 and include the optimal
associated funding profile for economic order quantity
material, long lead time material, and full funding in the
Department of Defense's fiscal year 2023 budget request.
Development of land-based long-range hypersonic weapons
The committee is encouraged by the speed with which the
Army is working to field an initial land-based long-range
hypersonic weapons capability in fiscal year 2023. Options
posed by the United States deploying long-range hypersonic
strike capability in multiple domains present dilemmas to
potential adversaries and can strengthen deterrence by
injecting complexity and uncertainty into the decision
processes of strategic competitors.
The committee encourages the Army to accelerate development
and fielding of the initial Long-Range Hypersonic Weapons
(LRHW) batteries where possible, with the understanding that
initial prototype-developed missiles that will be fielded will
cost more than subsequently-acquired ones. To better understand
future costs and inform future decisions, the committee directs
the Army to refine the cost estimate for additional currently-
designed hypersonic glide body missiles that are to be
acquired. Additionally, the committee directs the Army to
assess alternatives to the current LRHW missile, to include
lower-cost alternative glide bodies and air-breathing
hypersonic technologies and to provide a briefing on the
assessment to the Senate Armed Services Committee not later
than January 15, 2022.
Extended Range Cannon Artillery acquisition report
The committee supports the Army's efforts to increase the
range and lethality of cannon artillery in order to address
being outranged by currently fielded systems of strategic
competitors. The committee notes that the Extended Range Cannon
Artillery (ERCA) system incorporates a number of developmental
technologies, including an extended range cannon tube and
advanced munitions, grafted to a modified Paladin howitzer
currently in production.
As such, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to
provide a report, not later than February 28, 2022, to the
Senate Armed Services Committee on ERCA acquisition. The report
shall include an assessment and certification of platform
mobility and survivability, cannon tube sustainability, and
propellant and munition suitability to meet operational
requirements under operational conditions. The report shall
also include an assessment of the capability, capacity, and
benefits of leveraging commercial defense industrial base
infrastructure and expertise to assemble the ERCA platform.
Improved Turbine Engine Program
The committee commends the Army's continued development of
the Improved Turbine Engine Program. This program is designed
to develop a more fuel efficient and powerful engine to upgrade
and enhance the performance and operational readiness of the
current Black Hawk and Apache helicopter fleets. Importantly,
it will also serve as the Government-furnished engine for the
Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft program, the Chief of
Staff of the Army's priority Future Vertical Lift effort. This
program represents a cost-effective approach to modernizing
Army aviation, and the committee encourages the Army to pursue
opportunities to accelerate the fielding of this capability.
Joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar System modifications
The Air Force intends to replace the capability now
provided by the Joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar
System (JSTARS) with the Advanced Battle Management System, a
component of the Combined Joint All Domain Command and Control,
or CJADC2, a Department of Defense (DOD) effort to digitally
connect all elements of the U.S. military--from sensors to
shooters--across all five warfighting domains: air, land, sea,
space, and cyberspace. The committee fully supports
modernization of the JSTARS capability, but believes that the
Air Force needs to maintain the current aircraft and make
prudent upgrades to the current JSTARS systems until a
replacement capability is available. The committee continues to
be concerned by the Air Force's lack of progress on sustainment
and modification of JSTARS. In a recent report to the
congressional defense committees, the Air Force described plans
for modernizing JSTARS. While those efforts would have fallen
short of modernizing important systems, the budget request for
fiscal year 2022 would not even execute those plans for
ensuring that combatant commander requirements are met. Despite
existing legislation to the contrary, the budget request
proposes to retire four JSTARS aircraft and underfund
modernization of the aircraft that would remain in service. In
particular, the erratic funding profile for the Bandwidth
Efficient Common Data Link (BE-CDL) and the flat funding
profile of the Mobile User Objective System (MUOS) do not
provide any confidence that a reasonable acquisition strategy
is in place, nor do they satisfy mandated timelines.
Furthermore, the report provides no plans to satisfy the DOD
mandate to replace JSTARS' HAVE QUICK II radios with Second
Generation Anti-Jam Tactical UHF Radio for NATO (SATURN) radios
by October 1, 2024.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than November 30, 2021 with: (1) Funding profiles and
associated schedules to implement these critical capabilities
on the E-8C as expeditiously as possible; and (2) Any necessary
changes to the E-8C program management structure to ensure
those plans are executed.
Long range strike
The committee remains supportive of a mix of options across
multiple domains for combatant commanders in support of joint
long range targeting and effects. The committee is concerned
that the probability of decreasing budgets has the potential to
drive Hobson's choices with respect to long range strike.
Therefore, not later than March 15, 2022, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a
report assessing the long range strike capabilities of the
Department of Defense on a cost-per-effect basis, including the
ability to strike with precision over long ranges and providing
the requisite volume of fires, for purposes of maximizing
combat power within the overall defense budget. Additionally,
the report shall provide a cost-informed strategy that
addresses requirements for fires across domains and aligns with
the Joint Warfighting Concept.
Machine gun capability gap study
The committee is concerned that there is a gap in
capability between current medium and heavy machine guns in
terms of range, terminal effects, and weight, which anecdotal
evidence from operational employment of currently fielded
capabilities has highlighted. The committee supports Army
efforts to address a similar gap in rifles and automatic rifles
for close-combat formations through the development and
fielding of the Next Generation Squad Weapon. The committee is
aware of machine gun capability that exists between the current
M240 medium and M2 heavy machine gun that may address range and
lethality shortcomings of current medium machine guns at
soldier-borne weight.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to conduct a comparative study of machine gun capability in
this category of munitions. The study shall include, at a
minimum, a comparative analysis between M2 .50 caliber, M240
7.62mm, and .338 Norma Magnum capabilities, focused on the
metrics of range, lethality, weight, cost, and ability to
incorporate advanced optics. Where possible, the Army shall
consider incorporating data yielded from testing by U.S.
Special Operations Command to minimize duplication of effort.
The Secretary shall provide a briefing on the study to the
Senate Armed Service Committee not later than March 31, 2022.
Mobile Protected Firepower
The committee understands the importance of the Army's
efforts to procure a light tank for Infantry Brigade Combat
Teams (IBCTs). The Army has recognized that IBCTs need
dedicated large-caliber direct-fire weapons support in a
lighter protected platform that offers greater tactical
mobility and air transportability. The committee understands
the Army is committed to the Mobile Protected Firepower (MPF)
program as one of its signature modernization efforts because
it significantly increases the lethality, survivability, and
flexibility of infantry formations not organically equipped
with Bradleys or Strykers.
The committee notes that the Army's fiscal year 2022 budget
request included the first year of procurement funding for the
MPF program. Given the importance of the program, the committee
encourages the Army to execute the program without delay.
Modernizing Army short-range air defense capabilities
The committee continues to note the Army's efforts to
reconstitute its short-range air defense (SHORAD) systems. Of
the capabilities tested, the Army has decided on an Initial
Maneuver SHORAD (IM-SHORAD) system consisting of a Stryker
vehicle equipped with multiple air defense weapons, including
legacy missiles. The Army plans to begin fielding IM-SHORAD
vehicles in fiscal year 2021. While the committee applauds the
Army's efforts to date, it remains concerned that potential
adversaries, such as Russia and China, have developed new
aircraft and unmanned aerial systems with operational speeds
that can quickly close on U.S. ground forces. The committee
believes that there is an unmet requirement to engage hostile
air assets at greater ranges to protect U.S. and allied ground
forces.
The committee therefore directs the Secretary of the Army,
not later than February 16, 2022, to provide a report to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the Army's efforts to reconstitute its
SHORAD systems to meet current and future air threats to ground
forces. This report shall be comprehensive and address issues
including, but not limited to: (1) The Army's prioritization
level for modernizing SHORAD systems; (2) Whether the Army is
allocating sufficient funds for SHORAD systems; (3) How the
Army's efforts will address emerging air threats, including an
analysis of propulsion technologies available to extend the
range of legacy missiles; and (4) Whether the planned force
structure of IM-SHORAD units is sufficient to meet Army
requirements.
Multi-spectral sensor detection mitigation for body armor and
individual equipment
The committee notes that multi-spectral sensor detection is
an emerging threat on the battlefield as near-peer competitors
and non-state actors gain access to advanced thermal imagers.
Given recent developments in sensor technologies, their
increasing proliferation, and the incorporation of multi-
spectral sensor detection mitigation in combat uniforms, the
committee is concerned the military services are not developing
multi-spectral sensor detection mitigation capabilities in body
armor and individual equipment.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army,
in coordination with the Secretary of the Navy and the
Secretary of the Air Force, to conduct a feasibility study on
incorporating multi-spectral sensor detection mitigation
technologies into body armor and individual equipment. The
Secretary of the Army shall provide a briefing on the study to
the congressional defense committees not later than December 1,
2021.
Paladin Integrated Management acquisition strategy
The committee is concerned by the substantially reduced
modernization investment in enduring combat vehicle platforms
that comprise the Army's Armored Brigade Combat Teams (ABCTs),
including the Paladin Integrated Management (PIM) armored,
self-propelled howitzer. Faced with difficult budgetary
choices, the Army prioritized funding its highest modernization
priority efforts at the expense of continuing timely
modernization of enduring ABCT combat vehicle platforms,
supporting tactical wheeled vehicles, and munitions.
PIM, which is the Army's program to modernize ABCT organic
artillery, was significantly impacted by this budget-driven
approach. The President's budget request for fiscal year 2022
reduced PIM production to nearly half the quantities programmed
for in the fiscal year 2021 budget request. This reduction
would not only slow modernization of ABCT organic artillery by
nearly half, it would strain production lines and suppliers,
and would increase the per vehicle-set cost of PIM by 17
percent due to the reduced quantities.
Elsewhere in this Act, the committee adds $199.5 million
for PIM production to address the Chief of Staff of the Army's
unfunded priorities list and achieve procurement quantities
that avoid nearly $50.0 million in additional costs of ordering
at the reduced budget request level. For future years, the
committee is concerned that the Army may not program sufficient
quantities to achieve its modernization plan and economic
production rates that provide best value for the Army.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
a briefing, not later than February 15, 2022, on the planned
acquisition strategy for PIM. The briefing shall include
procurement quantities through the future years defense
program, quantities required to complete planned modernization
of both the Regular Army and National Guard units, quantities
required to realize economic production rate savings, and
quantities required to ensure industrial base minimum
sustainment requirements. The briefing shall also include an
assessment of the merits of requesting multiyear production
authority and an assessment of how co-located production of
Extended-Range Cannon Artillery with PIM production could help
address industrial base minimum sustainment requirements and
provide economic benefits to the Government.
RC-135 Rivet Joint
The committee recognizes the RC-135 fleet's role in Great
Power Competition and vital contributions to understanding
adversary intent and capabilities across a range of military
operations. The committee also acknowledges that the Air
Force's report on unmet intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance (ISR) requirements in connection with the RC-135
Rivet Joint aircraft and that combatant commanders' demand for
the RC-135's unique capabilities exceeds the current fleet's
capacity. Further, to increase RC-135 aircraft availability,
the Air Force has been prioritizing the restoration of
operational capabilities lost as a result of the March 2019
Offut Air Force Base floods as the primary line of effort. The
committee understands that replacing the current NC-135 test
aircraft with an aircraft equipped in an operationally
representative configuration could help reduce RC-135 depot
maintenance timelines and materially improve overall aircraft
availability. Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary
of the Air Force to provide a briefing to the congressional
defense committees, not later than February 1, 2022, on the
costs and benefits of available options for replacing the NC-
135 test aircraft with an aircraft in an operationally
representative configuration.
Report on Agile Combat Employment
Agile Combat Employment (ACE) is an operational concept
that is meant to leverage networks of well-established and
austere air bases, multi-capable airmen, pre-positioned
equipment, and airlift to rapidly deploy, disperse, and
maneuver combat capability throughout a theater. Paired with
aircraft fueling, arming, and limited maintenance activities,
ACE expands the number of bases from which the U.S. military
can generate combat sorties. The committee believes the Air
Force needs to apply ACE to U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, U.S.
European Command, and to operations within the United States.
The United States used to have more options for operating and
launching strategic forces, but many of those options have
vanished due to base closures, neglect, and crumbling
infrastructure. The few that remain viable will likely follow
suit unless they are maintained and exercised. ACE exercises
also provide more opportunities to train multi-capable airmen
and exercise ACE planners without the added expense of and
foreign dependence on an overseas exercise. There are locations
within the continental United States (CONUS) and Alaska that
have the necessary runway and infrastructure, but also have the
absence of existing bomber or fighter units, thereby allowing
austere training while mitigating risk. Additional ACE
exercises in North America would ensure the ACE concept is
actually executed proficiently, and not just talked about in
academic settings.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force, in consultation with the Secretary of the Navy, to
provide to the congressional defense committees not later than
January 31, 2022, a report describing the feasibility of ACE
exercises in the Pacific, Europe, and within the CONUS and
Alaska. The report shall include any currently scheduled ACE
exercises within the CONUS or elsewhere. The report shall also
include a list of requirements for a base or location to be
used in an ACE exercise, to include a breakdown of requirements
for various types of exercises such as nuclear bomber
exercises, conventional bomber exercises, and fighter
exercises. Finally, the report shall include a list of those
bases and locations currently meeting such requirements and
those that could do so with minor modification.
Report on cryptographic modernization and resiliency of communications
systems
The committee remains supportive of the Department of
Defense's efforts to develop technology in support of Joint All
domain Command and Control (JADC2). However, the committee is
concerned with the budgeting and execution of the
communications programs critical to the realization of JADC2.
Specifically, the committee is concerned with the progress of
the cryptographic modernization program effort across the
entire Department and the broad use of commercial off-the-shelf
technology that may not provide required capabilities when
faced with a near-peer adversary. Therefore the committee
directs the military service chiefs to provide a report, not
later than February 1, 2022, to the congressional defense
committees that details the cryptographic modernization
strategy of each applicable program, including cost, schedule,
and funded and unfunded requirements.
Additionally, the report shall detail how all
communications systems fielded or in development will meet the
requirements of section 168 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for 2020 (Public Law 116-92), including how
the Department's use of commercial off-the-shelf capability
will achieve the resiliency required in that statute.
Report on enhanced night vision and visual augmentation devices
The committee supports the continued development and
fielding of advanced night vision devices and visual
augmentation systems and recognizes these systems provide a
critical capability to fight, rehearse, and train in all
expected combat conditions. The committee further notes that
the Army has several advanced night vision or visual
augmentation devices in development or fielding, and that these
devices have different capability with respect to optical
acuity, visual augmentation, network integration, physical
dexterity, and power consumption.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
a report to the congressional defense committees, not later
than February 28, 2022, on an updated assessment and
distribution plan for enhanced night vision and visual
augmentation devices, based on developmental outcomes,
differing capabilities, and operational testing of these
devices. The updated plan shall include: (1) The basis of issue
of the devices within close-combat formations and supporting
forces; (2) The rationale for the basis of issue based on
anticipated mission requirements; (3) A battery management
strategy based on assessed power consumption for anticipated
missions; (4) Acquisition objectives and funding profiles based
on the updated basis of issue and distribution; (5) Details on
how the Army plans to ensure competition amongst night and
augmented visual systems from multiple suppliers, to include
both traditional and commercial suppliers; and (6) Any other
matters the Secretary considers relevant.
Report on excess military equipment
The committee recognizes the potential use of divested
Department of Defense equipment to provide additional
capabilities to foreign partners. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the
congressional defense committees not later than March 15, 2022,
regarding potential excess military equipment, particularly
combat aircraft, scheduled for decommissioning that could be
transferred under the Excess Defense Articles program of the
Defense Security Cooperation Agency to foreign partners,
including Taiwan.
Report on personnel parachute and cargo management inventory
acquisition decisions
The committee remains concerned that the Army is developing
an interim parachute management system that is slated to be
replaced by a program of record in the 2027 timeframe. The
committee acknowledges receipt of the report on Personnel
Parachute and Cargo Management Inventory, required by the
committee report accompanying H.R. 6395 (H. Rept. 116-442), the
William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2021, as passed by the House of
Representatives, which the Army provided to the committee on
January 8, 2021. The report concluded that the existing paper-
based system used by parachute riggers is inadequate. The
report then explained the Army's approach to addressing the
shortcomings of the current system. The report states that the
Army conducted market research on available systems and used
the information to ``further define the future state
considerations and capabilities.''
The committee notes that the report only indicates that the
Army conducted an ``informal assessment'' of available systems
and that the report does not conclude that the commercially
available systems do not meet the Army's requirements. The
committee further notes that there are commercial off-the-shelf
(COTS) systems being used in several military installations.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
a briefing to the congressional defense committees not later
than February 28, 2022, that explains:
(1) The projected cost of the Mobile Asset Tracker-
Automated Parachute Management (MAT-APM);
(2) How does the MAT-APM capability meet joint
service requirements;
(3) Which Army organization is the proponent for the
requirement;
(4) Whether the Army conducted a business case
analysis comparing the cost of developing a Government
solution and deploying an interim solution for
parachute management with the cost of a COTS system;
(5) How the Army determined that currently available
commercial systems do not meet the Army's Enterprise
materiel asset tracking requirements at the tactical
level;
(6) How the Army determined that a Government
development effort is necessary; and
(7) Whether the Airborne Board was consulted before
the Army decided to embark on this development effort
and if the Board was informed that there is a program
of record slated to replace the interim system within a
few years.
Report on training of military pilots
The committee is aware of various pilot shortfalls
throughout the services and is concerned that the requirement
to produce pilots may be driving multiple efforts across the
services to increase production without ensuring that the
quality of the pilot training graduates improves or at the very
least remains unchanged.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force and the Secretary of the Navy to conduct a study and
provide a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than June 1, 2022 on the efficacy and efficiency of the
various pilot training initiatives and pilot programs being
undertaken by the services with respect to the quality of
graduates. Additionally, the study shall include whether the
current number of pilot training bases are adequate for the
required pilot production by service and an analysis of
vertical takeoff and landing pilot training and provide
recommendations on the most effective way to train pilots in
these hybrid aircraft. The committee directs the Secretaries to
provide an interim briefing to the congressional defense
committees on the findings of the study not later than March 1,
2022.
Soldier Enhancement Program
Since the Congress created the program in 1990, the Soldier
Enhancement Program (SEP) has served as an effective process
designed to help the Army move at ``the speed of industry'' by
evaluating existing prototypes or commercially available items
that could enhance soldiers' ability to execute their combat
mission. SEP continues to serve a unique and critical function
in enabling the accelerated evaluation and procurement of off-
the-shelf items that have the potential to substantially
improve weapons and support equipment that are focused on
critical war-fighting functional areas of fires, mission
command, movement and maneuver, sustainability, and protection.
The committee notes that SEP has transitioned to Army Futures
Command. The committee commends the Army for reestablishing
committed funding in the fiscal year 2022 budget and encourages
the Army to continue its commitment to this critical program.
Soldier load management strategy update
The committee notes that fielding of advanced capabilities,
such as enhanced night vision, visual augmentation systems, and
associated networking radios and batteries, are adding weight
to the soldier load. The weight and configuration of these
advanced capabilities, when added to standard mission combat
loads that include weapons, ammunition, armor, and other
mission equipment, have the potential to negatively impact
soldier performance and small unit effectiveness and soldier
agility in contact. The committee recognizes the Army's prior
holistic effort to manage soldier load but believes the
proliferation of advanced technologies in close-combat units
and emerging small-unit supporting platforms warrants re-
examination of soldier load.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee not later
than February 15, 2022, on an updated assessment and strategy
for management of the combat load for close-combat units
including load carrying equipment that is appropriate for the
``last tactical mile'' and subterranean operations. The
assessment shall describe how the U.S. Army Special Operations
Command and U.S. Army Maneuver Center of Excellence are
addressing the issue and provide a description and status of
load carrying platforms the Army is examining and planned
procurements and fielding or deployment of these platforms. The
assessment shall address weights associated with advanced
technologies, batteries, and peripheral equipment as well as
incorporate anticipated weights and planned reductions for
weapons, ammunition, armor, and other soldier items.
Tactical and combat vehicle electrification
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
a briefing to the congressional defense committees by January
31, 2022, on the status of the tactical and combat vehicle
electrification (TaCV-E) initial capabilities document (ICD)
and electric light reconnaissance vehicle (eLRV) rapid
prototype program. The briefing shall include, but not be
limited to: courses of action to accelerate eLRV to include
funding requirements and engagement strategies with the
commercial industrial base and how the Army and U.S. Special
Operations Command (SOCOM) are communicating and coordinating
on vehicle electrification technology development to include
test and evaluation strategies.
The committee understands the Army is currently developing
a TaCV-E ICD that is expected to provide the operational
requirements foundation for electrification of the Army's
ground vehicle fleet. The committee understands the TaCV-E ICD
will provide opportunities for new starts and electrification
modification of existing vehicles. The committee also notes the
Army's eLRV program is a rapid prototyping effort to facilitate
the development of an all-electric tactical vehicle through the
use of experimentation and soldier touch points that would also
help inform the TaCV-E initiative.
The committee supports the TaCV-E plan and the eLRV effort
and encourages the Army to sufficiently fund these efforts. The
committee is aware the automotive industry is aggressively
moving forward with electrification of commercial automotive
technologies to include advanced battery technology development
and believes the Army should fully leverage these technologies
through the appropriate use of acquisition reform initiatives
to engage with non-traditional industry partners to help
accelerate eLRV prototype development. The committee encourages
the Army to also consider potential operational exportable
power generation benefits of electrification modifications of
existing tactical vehicles, such as the infantry squad vehicle,
as part of the eLRV effort where operationally feasible and
appropriate. In addition, the committee is also aware of
similar efforts being considered by SOCOM.
U.S. Southern Command requirements
The committee notes that U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM)
is responsible for deterring aggression, defeating threats to
enhance U.S. security, and defending the U.S. Homeland and
national interests. Although the SOUTHCOM area of
responsibility (AOR) is important to national security, the
Department of Defense is required to make difficult choices
among the various combatant commands in allocating forces in
peacetime through the Global Force Management Allocation Plan
(GFMAP). The committee understands that SOUTHCOM does not
always receive a high priority in the GFMAP allocation.
The committee would like to better understand what
additional resources might be required to support SOUTHCOM
priority requirements. Therefore, the committee directs the
following reports to be submitted to the congressional defense
committees with the budget request for fiscal year 2023: (1) A
report from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that
identifies the range of forces that would be appropriate to
allocate to SOUTHCOM were additional forces available; and (2)
A report from the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) that
identifies options for assigning additional forces, such as
ships and aircraft, to the SOUTHCOM naval component, the United
States 4th Fleet. The CNO's assessment shall consider the
potential use of ships and aircraft scheduled to be
decommissioned and address specific needs to sustain the
presence of Navy vessels assigned to the SOUTHCOM AOR.
Warm Isostatic Press for manufacture of body armor
The committee recognizes that composite armor raw material
performance has improved, but current industry manufacturing
capabilities cannot maximize the capability of the advanced
materials. The committee notes that using a Warm Isostatic
Press (WIP), vice uni-axial presses currently in use, may have
the potential to reduce the weight of body armor by nearly 30
percent at the same ballistic protection level and permit
manufacture of compound body armor shapes for differing human
profiles.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to conduct an assessment of the utility and potential strategy
for establishing a domestic WIP capability for the purpose of
producing lighter weight, higher protection, lower profile body
armor and lightweight aviation armor components. The assessment
shall include, but not be limited to: an assessment of the
potential benefits of using a WIP in the manufacture of body
and lightweight aviation armor; potential strategies for
establishing a domestic WIP capability for the production of
body armor, including Government-funded and public-private
shared funding approaches; and respective costs of the
potential strategies. The Secretary shall provide the
committee, not later than March 1, 2022, a briefing on the
assessment.
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Authorization of appropriations (sec. 201)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriations for research, development, test, and
evaluation activities at the levels identified in section 4201
of division D of this Act.
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations
Increase in allowable rate of basic pay for certain employees of
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (sec. 211)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
(DARPA) to pay additional compensation to technical program
managers to support DARPA's mission of funding and managing
high-risk, high-reward research, development, and prototyping
activities to support the National Defense Strategy. The
committee notes that these individuals are uniquely qualified
to develop and manage research programs in emerging sectors,
such as artificial intelligence, biotechnology, robotics, and
hypersonics. The committee further notes that the provision
serves to also reduce the bureaucratic burden and complexity of
the processes required to pay these individuals under current
authorities, improving auditability and reducing the risk of
errors.
Additional mission areas for mechanisms for expedited access to
technical talent and expertise at academic institutions by
Department of Defense (sec. 212)
The committee recommends a provision that would add
additional topics to the areas authorized for the Secretary of
Defense and the Secretaries of the military departments to
establish streamlined and expedited contracting mechanisms to
better access critical talent. The committee notes that the
National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence's Final
Report highlighted the importance of research security and
integrity.
Modification of other transaction authority for research projects (sec.
213)
The committee recommends a provision that would remove the
requirement for regulatory implementation of Other Transaction
(OT) Authority for research projects under section 2371 of
title 10, United States Code, and replace it with the more
flexible option of Department of Defense (DOD) guidance.
The committee notes that the existing regulatory
requirement was established at a time when DOD was slow to
issue any type of guidance to the workforce on the use of OTs.
Since then, DOD has become much more proactive in its guidance.
For example, the Office of the Director, Defense Pricing and
Contracting, issued a comprehensive OT Guide in December 2018
that it is currently in the process of updating; the Defense
Acquisition University has been providing training and
education materials online about the proper use of OTs; and the
DOD Grants and Agreements Regulations Working Group under the
Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering is developing a Research OT Guide to provide
additional guidance on the unique aspects of OTs awarded under
section 2371 of title 10, United States Code.
Artificial intelligence metrics (sec. 214)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to review, not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the potential
applications of artificial intelligence (AI) and digital
technology to Department of Defense platforms, processes, and
operations. The provision would also require the establishment
of performance objectives and accompanying metrics for the
incorporation of AI and digital readiness into Department of
Defense platforms, processes, and operations.
The provision would also require the Secretary to direct
the heads of the military departments and components of the
Department to conduct a review of skill gaps in the fields of
software development, software engineering, knowledge
management, data science, and AI. Further, the provision would
require the Secretary to develop performance objectives and
accompanying metrics related to AI research and development;
exercises, wargames, and experimentation; logistics and
sustainment; innovation initiatives; and business AI
applications.
The provision would also require the Secretary to submit a
report on the findings of the review as well as the performance
objectives and accompanying metrics established to the
congressional defense committees not later than 120 days after
the completion of the review.
The committee notes that the final report of the National
Security Commission for Artificial Intelligence highlights the
establishment of AI and digital readiness performance goals as
an important step to achieving a state of military AI readiness
by 2025. The committee believes that it is important for the
Department to ensure that the workforce contains the skillsets
required to adopt these emerging technologies.
Modification of the Joint Common Foundation Program (sec. 215)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to modify the Joint Common Foundation
(JCF) program conducted by the Joint Artificial Intelligence
Center (JAIC) to ensure that Department of Defense (DOD)
Components can easily contract with leading commercial
artificial intelligence (AI) companies to support the rapid and
efficient development and deployment of applications and
capabilities.
The committee does not intend for the Secretary to halt or
otherwise disrupt the ongoing JCF program that is already under
contract. Rather, the intent is for the Secretary to establish
parallel processes as necessary to ensure that leading
commercial providers of AI platforms, services, tools, testing
capabilities, and software algorithms and algorithm development
capabilities are contractually available to DOD Components. The
committee notes that commercial industry already provides a
robust and competitive marketplace for supporting AI
development and that this industry will continue to outstrip
any custom solution that the DOD could build. Taking advantage
of this vibrant, competitive commercial industry will save
money and time, and ensure that DOD Components have access to
the best technology available.
The committee intends that the JCF's commercial
participants are able, as necessary and appropriate according
to the role they play in DOD Components' development
activities, to participate in programs like PlatformOne to
qualify as DevSecOps software factories certified for automatic
authority to operate and continuous delivery.
The committee furthermore intends that the JAIC JCF program
office provide assistance to DOD Components to enable
components to select and contract with the most suitable
commercial vendors to support their AI initiatives. The JCF
role should be to enable DOD Components to focus their
attention and resources on the development of AI applications
based on the components' domain expertise, data, and
operational challenges.
Executive education on emerging technologies for senior civilian and
military leaders (sec. 216)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to establish executive education
activities on emerging technologies for appropriate senior
civilian and military leaders. The provision would also require
the Secretary to provide a report on the status of implementing
such activities to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives not later than 3 years
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
The committee notes that section 248 of the William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) directed the Secretary of
Defense to carry out a pilot program on self-directed training
for Department of Defense civilians and military members in
advanced technologies, such as artificial intelligence, data
science, machine learning, fifth-generation telecommunications
technology, and biotechnology. The committee believes that
education on advanced technologies remains particularly useful
for senior civilian and military leaders. The committee
encourages the Department to take a comprehensive look at who
should be required to complete this training to benefit people
in non-technical positions whose functions are increasingly
being affected by technological change.
The committee also notes that the National Security
Commission on Artificial Intelligence's Final Report highlights
the need for senior civilian and military leaders to understand
relevant technologies and how these technologies may be applied
to military and business outcomes in the Department of Defense.
The committee believes that increasing the awareness of
emerging technologies and their applications to the warfighter
is critical in building future warfighting concepts and that
developing a short course to routinely inform senior decision
makers is an important step towards increasing artificial
intelligence capabilities within the Department.
Improvements relating to national network for microelectronics research
and development (sec. 217)
The committee recommends a provision that would make
improvements to the national network for microelectronics
research and development originally authorized under the
Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors for
America (CHIPS) Act, Title XCIX, section 9903(b) of the William
M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283). The provision would
mandate the establishment of the microelectronics research
network, given that the committee believes that the Department
of Defense is reluctant to use the permissive authority
provided in the CHIPS Act to establish the envisioned research
network.
The committee notes that while ongoing Department of
Defense research activities, including the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency Electronics Resurgence Initiative, are
important elements of a comprehensive strategy to restore U.S.
superiority in the development of next generation
microelectronics capabilities and establish commercially viable
microelectronics production capabilities in the United States,
they are not completely responsive to the mandates of the CHIPS
Act. The provision would clarify that the network be
established with multiple geographically diverse entities, if
possible. The committee stresses the importance of making the
process of moving microelectronics research innovation from
laboratories to fabrication facilities more effective.
Activities to accelerate domestic quantum computing capabilities (sec.
218)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a set of activities to
accelerate the development and deployment of a large-scale,
dual-use quantum computing capability and to ensure the
Department of Defense consistently has access to state-of-the-
art quantum computing capabilities. The provision would also
require annual reports through December 31, 2026.
The committee directs the Director of the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency to develop an acquisition strategy
ensuring that funding decisions are made considering technical
merit and return on investment to both the Government and the
private sector; encouraging private sector cost share of
investment; and using a phased and gated development and
procurement approach to manage and control technical risk. The
committee directs the Director to provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees on the acquisition strategy
not later than March 1, 2022.
Pilot programs for passive telecommunications infrastructure to
facilitate installation 5G deployment (sec. 219)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretaries of the military departments to establish pilot
programs for the deployment of passive telecommunications
infrastructure to facilitate the deployment of fifth-generation
(5G) wireless telecommunications on military installations. The
provision would also require the Secretaries of the military
departments to submit regular reports on their respective pilot
programs to the congressional defense committees.
The committee expects that the infrastructure deployments
will be financed by private sector partners and offered to
carriers as a shared resource, which could become a model to
reduce the cost and increase the pace of 5G wireless
deployment.
National Guard participation in microreactor testing and evaluation
(sec. 220)
The committee recommends a provision that would allow the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Director of the
Strategic Capabilities Office and the Chief of the National
Guard Bureau, to assemble a collection of National Guard units
to participate in the testing and evaluation of a micro nuclear
reactor program.
Limitation on transfer of certain operational flight test events and
reduction in operational flight test capacity (sec. 221)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the transfer of operational flight test events to nontest-
designated units until such time as the Director of Operational
Test and Evaluation, in consultation with the Secretary of the
Navy, has certified that the use of nontest-designated units to
conduct flight testing will not have any appreciable effect on
program cost or schedule, nor on the ability to complete
testing effectively.
Limitation on availability of funds for the High Accuracy Detection and
Exploitation System (sec. 222)
The committee recommends a provision that would limit Army
obligations for the High Accuracy Detection and Exploitation
System (HADES) portion of the Multi-Domain Sensing System
(MDSS) pending certain certifications from the Vice Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
The committee notes that the Army is planning to develop
and field a new intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
(ISR) system--the MDSS. The Army believes that the HADES
portion of MDSS will provide advanced aerial ISR capabilities
to support multi-domain operations against peer and near-peer
adversaries. Initial MDSS development has focused on providing
indications and warnings, electronic order of battle, patterns
of life, and target development for Army multi-domain
operations in both competition and conflict. Development
efforts have also focused on ensuring MDSS is globally
deployable and can operate at extended ranges to improve
survivability against enemy air defenses in a conflict. The
Army plan is to deploy the MDSS on higher altitude, longer
endurance fixed-wing aircraft that can provide effective
standoff from enemy anti-access/area denial systems. The Army
believes these capabilities will enable ground commanders to
detect, locate, identify, track, and target critical enemy
assets on the ground, supporting Army tactical consumers like
long-range precision fires.
The committee supports Army efforts to modernize and
reorganize for competition and, if necessary, conflict with
strategic competitors and understands the need to support
targeting of threat long-range fires and air defense systems.
However, the committee has concerns about the ability of the
manned, fixed-wing element of the MDSS to support operations in
a hostile environment, and seeks assurance that a new, manned
platform is the best way to achieve the Army's objectives in
the pre-hostilities phase of operations.
Therefore, the committee believes that, before spending a
significant amount of resources on the MDSS, the Vice Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff should determine whether: (1) The
HADES is a critical component of the Army's Project Convergence
and is consistent with the Department of Defense's Joint All
Domain Command and Control strategy; and (2) The HADES would be
able to operate and provide ISR to the ground component
commander at standoff distances sufficient to survive against
enemy air defenses, consistent with planned operational
concepts of employment.
Subtitle C--Codification and Technical Corrections
Codification of direct hire authority at personnel demonstration
laboratories for advanced degree holders (sec. 231)
The committee recommends a provision that would codify the
authority of the Defense laboratories to use direct hiring
authorities to appoint qualified candidates with advanced
degrees to work as scientists, engineers, and technical staff.
The committee originally established this authority in the
Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417) and notes that it has been
successfully used by the Defense laboratories to attract
technical talent in areas including robotics, hypersonics,
artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and other emerging
technology areas.
Codification of authorities relating to Department of Defense science
and technology reinvention laboratories (sec. 232)
The committee recommends a provision that would codify
existing authority for the lab personnel demonstration
activities that have been successfully used by Department of
Defense laboratories to attract and retain an expert Federal
Government technical workforce. The committee notes that these
personnel authorities have enabled the laboratories to compete
with the private sector for scientific and technical talent to
execute the critical innovation missions assigned to the
laboratories, especially in high priority modernization areas
such as artificial intelligence, biotechnology, hypersonics,
and robotics.
Codification of requirement for Defense Established Program to
Stimulate Competitive Research (sec. 233)
The committee recommends a provision that would codify the
requirement for the Secretary of Defense to execute the Defense
Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research. The
committee notes that the Department of Defense has used this
program to award research funding to universities in states
that traditionally receive less Department of Defense research
funding, including establishing partnerships with defense
laboratories, in order to expand the Department's research base
and increase the pipeline of technical talent into the defense
sector.
Technical correction to pilot program for enhancement of research,
development, test, and evaluation centers of Department of
Defense (sec. 234)
The committee recommends a provision that would make a
technical correction to a pilot program on improving
organizational management practices executed by defense
laboratories and test centers to reflect the removal of the
legislative requirement for the appointment of a Chief
Management Officer and reassignment of duties to the Deputy
Secretary of Defense. This change would designate the Deputy
Secretary as the approving official for management flexibility
changes requested by the Director of the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency. The committee notes that the pilot
program, first authorized in the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328), has resulted in
the military services reducing bureaucratic and other
management burdens that have impeded the efforts of
laboratories and test centers to support the modernization
goals of the Department of Defense.
Subtitle D--Plans, Reports, and Other Matters
Study on efficient use of Department of Defense test and evaluation
organizations, facilities, and laboratories (sec. 241)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Defense Science Board to report on options to improve the
effectiveness of Department of Defense test and evaluation
organizations, facilities, and laboratories.
Analysis of potential modifications to Department of Defense unmanned
aerial systems categorization (sec. 242)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to
review the current categorization of unmanned aerial systems
(UAS) to determine whether the Department of Defense (DOD)
should make changes to the current categorization. Since the
definition of categories as assigned by DOD may influence the
differentiation in the treatment of these unmanned aerial
systems under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations
(ITAR) and the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), the
Under Secretary shall consult with the Secretary of State in
reviewing the current UAS categorization.
The DOD currently categorizes UAS into five classes based
on speed, maximum gross take-off weight (MGTOW), and altitude
capability. The DOD has developed policies regarding training,
employment, and maintenance of UAS for each of these five
categories.
The committee understands that some believe the broad
definition used by the DOD for Group 3 UAS (UAS between 55 and
1,320 pounds MGTOW) results in applying rules to smaller
systems that are overly burdensome and result in: (1) Increased
cost of ownership of smaller UAS; (2) Limits on rapid fielding
of smaller UAS; (3) Discouragement of industry investment
developments; and (4) Forgone advancements in UAS technology
that might allow smaller Group 3 UAS to be operated in the same
manner as a Group 1 or Group 2 UAS.
Digital development infrastructure plan and working group (sec. 243)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a working group on digital
development infrastructure implementation. The provision would
also require the Secretary, through the established working
group, to develop a plan for the creation of a modern digital
development infrastructure that supports state of the art tools
and modern processes to enable development, testing, fielding,
and continuous update of artificial intelligence-powered
applications at speed and scale from headquarters to the
tactical edge.
Additionally, the provision would require the Secretary to
provide a report to the congressional defense committees, not
later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, on the status of the plan as well as on progress
assembling enterprise data sets. The committee notes that the
National Security Commission for Artificial Intelligence's
Final Report highlights the need for the Department of Defense
to establish digital ecosystem leadership and governance. The
committee believes that establishing and maintaining an open
architecture, an evolving reference design, governance
structure, and processes to include management and
authorization for ecosystem functions and growth is an
important step for the Department.
Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle requirements analysis (sec. 244)
The committee recommends a provision that would require a
report and briefing of analysis underpinning refined Optionally
Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV) requirements prior to entering
into a contract for physical prototyping of the OMFV. The
report would include details of the analysis of organizational
design, survivability, mobility, payload, and combat
effectiveness in execution of the critical operational tasks
required of fighting vehicle-equipped infantry within armor
brigade combat teams.
The committee supports Army prioritization of development
of the OMFV as critically needed to replace the M2 Bradley
Fighting Vehicle (BFV). The BFV has been in operational service
for more than 30 years and lacks the needed growth capacity to
achieve combat overmatch against advanced capabilities being
fielded by strategic competitors. Furthermore, the committee
supports the Army's efforts to ensure competition, assess
advanced technologies, and refine requirements through the
ongoing digital design phase.
Making permanent requirement for annual report by Director of
Operational Test and Evaluation (sec. 245)
The committee recommends a provision that would reestablish
a permanent requirement for an annual report from the Director
of Operational Test and Evaluation.
Budget Items
Army
Smart thread data exchange
The budget request contained $67.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA), for PE 61103A
for University Research Initiatives.
The committee notes the potential of additive manufacturing
to support Army modernization priorities and provide deployable
capabilities to support the production, repair, and sustainment
of Army systems. The committee notes that to realize the full
potential of additive manufacturing capabilities, the Army
needs to develop a secure network, as well as a data
architecture that supports exchange of technical data for
additive manufacturing systems, accounts for intellectual
property rights management, and provides connectivity to
systems designers.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $5.0
million in RDA for PE 61103A to further the development of data
exchange systems providing a secure digital engineering
environment to promote use of additive manufacturing throughout
the joint force.
Unmanned aircraft systems propulsion research
The budget request included $297.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA), for PE 61103A
Defense Research Sciences.
The committee notes that the Army is increasingly employing
unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) to perform critical missions,
such as surveillance, reconnaissance, and deployment of counter
measures that both augment manned systems and reduce risk to
soldiers. Many current unmanned aircraft depend on foreign-made
propulsion systems consisting of modified ground engines, which
drive up cost while impacting performance and reliability.
Research is needed to drive the design and development of next-
generation UAS propulsion systems and establish a robust,
sustainable domestic industrial base that can meet the
military's mission-specific needs.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $1.5
million in RDA for PE 61103A for building a domestic research
and industrial base for UAS propulsion.
University research programs
The budget request included $67.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA), for PE 61103A
University Research Initiatives.
The committee recognizes it is crucial to adequately fund,
resource, and structure the Department of Defense to conduct
research, development, and testing activities for critical
emerging technologies to stay ahead of United States
adversaries, most notably Russia and China. Resources must be
devoted and responsibly spent toward research and development
in critical sectors, including artificial intelligence, quantum
computing, hypersonics, directed energy, biotechnology,
autonomy, cyber, space, 5G, microelectronics, and fully
networked command, control, and communications technologies.
The committee is concerned that the balance of science and
technology research in the Army is trending away from basic
research, and focusing on more near-term applied research.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $30.0
million in RDA for PE 61103A to increase emphasis on the basic
research activities performed by the Army to fuel the
innovation of the Department for the future.
Ceramic material systems for extreme environments
The budget request included $64.1 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 62141A
Lethality Technology.
The committee recognizes the critical threat posed by enemy
hypersonic weapons. The committee notes that hypersonic
interceptors experience extreme temperatures that would destroy
most materials systems. As a result, ceramic materials, which
have excellent high temperature performance, may be required
for many hypersonic interceptor components.
The committee recommends an additional $2.5 million in RDA
for PE 62141A for the development of ceramic materials and
associated manufacturing processes for materials designed for
these extreme environments.
Earthen structures research
The budget request included $56.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 62144A
Ground Technology.
The committee notes the need to develop new materials, such
as biopolymers, that can be used to enhance military earthen
structures to meet Army requirements and reduce the military's
carbon footprint.
To achieve this goal, the committee recommends an
additional $3.0 million in RDA for PE 62144A for research
partnerships with universities to support development of
advanced biopolymers for military earthen structures.
Graphene applications for military engineering
The budget request included $56.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 62144A
Ground Technology.
The committee notes that graphene materials show promise to
support a number of defense applications including in ballistic
armor and high energy density batteries. The committee notes
the importance of efforts in graphene applications in multi-
functional materials for force protection, new materials for
power projection infrastructure, and new materials that support
innovations in expeditionary water treatment and environmental
sensing technologies.
Therefore, to support additional research for Army
modernization priorities, the committee recommends an
additional $2.0 million in RDA for PE 62144A for research on
applications of graphene for military engineering.
Polar research and testing
The budget request included $56.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 62144A
Ground Technology.
The committee notes that improving capabilities for Arctic
operations is critical for national security missions. The
committee notes the limited Federal investment in polar
research, which results in a limited technical workforce with
expertise on the environmental conditions that would impact
personnel and equipment deployed to cold weather climates.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million in RDA for PE 62144A for the development of polar
research and testing capabilities.
Verified inherent control
The budget request included $56.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 62144A
Ground Technology.
The committee notes that the verification and control of
the material properties of end products is critical for the
trusted deployment of additive manufacturing systems to the
warfighter given increasing supply chain threat and
cybersecurity challenges.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $2.0
million in RDA for PE 62144A to support cyber-hardening of
additive manufacturing systems and equipment to support
validation of 3D printed systems.
Light detection and ranging technology
The budget request included $172.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 62145A
Next Generation Combat Vehicle Technology.
The committee notes that light detection and ranging
(LiDAR) technology can be used to improve situational awareness
and battlefield sensing and significantly enhance warfighter
preparedness and mission execution against emerging threats.
The committee notes that the Army Research Laboratory has
developed a microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) mirror-based
LiDAR sensor for manned and unmanned vehicle applications.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $2.5
million in RDA for PE 62145A to support additional research on
MEMS mirror-based LiDAR systems for Army applications.
Unmanned aerial systems sensor research
The budget request included $84.6 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 62146A
Network C3I Technology.
The committee notes that the Department of Defense is
exploring the use of multiple drones carrying different types
of sensors to support precise target detection and
discrimination capabilities in order to provide operational
units with enhanced battlefield situational awareness.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $2.0
million in RDA for PE 62146A for the development of
multispectral sensors for unmanned aerial systems.
Counter-unmanned aerial systems applied research
The budget request included $19.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 62150A Air
and Missile Defense Technology.
The committee recognizes that unmanned aerial systems (UAS)
present an ever-increasing threat to U.S. troops and assets.
The committee notes the need for research to evaluate counter-
UAS threats and develop mitigation technologies to support
military operations.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDA for PE 62150A to continue supporting counter-UAS
research activities.
High energy laser research
The budget request included $19.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 62150A Air
and Missile Defense Technology.
The committee notes that the current National Defense
Strategy identifies directed energy as a critical technology in
defense modernization activities. The development of directed
energy capabilities will require numerous technical advances,
including enhancing modeling and simulation and technology
integration capabilities; expanding lethality testing; and
improving beam control and automated detection, track, and
engagement of targets.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $5.0
million in RDA for PE 62150A for additional high energy laser
research.
High energy laser support technology
The budget request included $19.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA), for PE 62150A
Air and Missile Defense Technology.
The committee notes that the Army has identified integrated
air and missile defense as one of the six Army priorities for
modernization. Incorporating high energy laser technology on
mobile platforms holds promise to counter enemy indirect fire
and missile capabilities, and can facilitate the protection of
forward operating bases.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $5.0
million in RDA for PE 62150A to support development and testing
of mobile and transportable high energy laser systems.
Kill chain automation for air and missile defense systems
The budget request included $19.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 62150A Air
and Missile Defense Technology.
The committee supports the Army's ongoing efforts to
integrate its air and missile defense systems. In order to
maintain an asymmetric advantage in future warfare, the
committee also supports continued research and development of
incorporating artificial intelligence (AI) to improve kill
chain automation for Army air and missile defense systems.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $8.0
million in RDA for PE 62150A to develop and demonstrate
advanced kill chain automation using multi-sensor fusion for
improved air and missile defense multi-target tracking, as well
as AI and machine learning algorithms to improve target
discrimination and defeat.
Secure computing capabilities
The budget request included $19.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA), for PE 62150A
Air and Missile Defense Technology.
The committee notes that defense platforms and weapons
systems rely heavily on automation, with electronic equipment
and computer networks as their primary components. As these
systems grow, their complexity and code size has created a
larger attack surface that can be exploited by adversaries. The
committee notes the Army is addressing these issues in part by
demonstrating commercial software elements necessary to secure
defense systems.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $5.0
million in RDA for PE 62150A for development of secure
computing and active cybersecurity capabilities.
Military footwear research
The budget request included $11.1 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 62184A
Soldier Applied Research.
The committee is aware of the work being done by the Army
Combat Capabilities Development Command Soldier Center in
improving the protection, survivability, mobility, and combat
effectiveness of military footwear. The committee is also aware
of the current investment in new performance standards that
will allow the industrial base to incorporate new materials and
advanced manufacturing processes in the development and
production of military footwear.
Therefore, in order to ensure that the domestic military
footwear industrial base can leverage new materials and
innovation, the committee recommends an additional $2.5 million
in RDA for PE 62184A to support additional investment in
military footwear research.
Pathfinder air assault technologies
The budget request included $11.1 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 62184A
Soldier Applied Research.
The committee notes the efforts of Army Futures Command to
engage university researchers with soldiers to more efficiently
transition research innovations into operational use.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $5.0
million in RDA for PE 62184A to support Army-university
research partnerships exploring next generation air assault
technologies.
Additive manufacturing capabilities for austere operating environments
The budget request included $23.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 63119A
Ground Advanced Technology.
The committee notes that the Army needs a capability to
build crossings and repair infrastructure and roads using
native materials in the theater of operations. This reduces
logistical burdens and lightens the operational load of
maneuver units. Additive manufacturing and autonomous
construction technologies show promise in automating
contingency construction activities for the Army and reducing
the risk to soldiers.
The committee recommends an additional $15.0 million in RDA
for PE 63119A to continue studies and development of Army
additive manufacturing capabilities for austere operating
environments.
Permafrost research
The budget request included $23.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 63119A for
Ground Advanced Technology.
The committee notes the value of research to test the
mechanical properties of ice-rich soils to better understand
the performance of materials, devices, systems, and
infrastructure in cold weather and arctic conditions.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $3.0
million in RDA for PE 63119A for permafrost research activities
and to modernize permafrost research facilities.
High Performance Computing Modernization Program
The budget request included $189.1 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 63461A
High Performance Computing Modernization Program.
The High Performance Computing Modernization Program
provides high performance computing and advanced networking
capabilities for research engineering needs of the Department
of Defense. The program administers supercomputing centers run
by the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Army Corps of Engineers in
support of science and technology, test, and evaluation, and
acquisition engineering activities, as well as other Government
agencies and private sector users.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $5.0
million in RDA for PE 63461A for the High Performance Computing
Modernization Program.
Combat vehicle lithium battery development
The budget request included $165.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 63462A for
Next Generation Combat Vehicle Advanced Technology.
The committee notes that meeting the Army's ground vehicle
systems power goals requires investment in efficient
manufacturing practices that are dual-use, automated, and
flexible. The committee notes that next generation lithium
battery technology can support improvements in the safety, fuel
efficiency, systems reliability, lethality, and silent watch
capability of ground vehicles.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $1.5
million in RDA for PE 63462A for combat vehicle lithium battery
development.
Cyber and connected vehicle integration research
The budget request included $165.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 63462A
Next Generation Combat Vehicle Advanced Technology.
The committee notes the increasing threats to military
cyber-physical systems, including combat vehicles.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $3.5
million in RDA for PE 63462A to fund integrated academic,
commercial, and Government research and testing activities to
evaluate and secure vehicle systems.
Robotics development
The budget request included $165.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 63462A
Next Generation Combat Vehicle Advanced Technology.
The committee notes that the Army is developing
technologies for small unit ground robotic capabilities to
support future Army missions.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $5.0
million in RDA for PE 63462A to support these efforts and to
better integrate robotics technology development with tactical-
level maneuver units and the appropriate training commands.
Command post modernization
The budget request included $155.9 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 63463A
Network C3I Advanced Technology.
The committee notes that the modernization of command post
systems and technologies is a priority of the Army.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $2.0
million in RDA for PE 63463A for the development of advanced
materials and technologies for next generation command post
systems to enable more mobile and survivable forward deployed
units.
Network technology research
The budget request included $155.9 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 63463A
Network C3I Advanced Technology.
The committee is concerned about duplication among the
services in efforts to develop battlefield networks, with
limited coordination among organizations with respect to
interoperability, technical standards, or considerations of the
joint operating environment.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $15.0
million in RDA for PE 63463A and directs the Undersecretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering to improve the
coordination and reduce the duplication between service and
agency network research and development programs.
Advanced guidance technology
The budget request included $93.9 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA), for PE 63464A
Long Range Precision Fires Advanced Technology.
The committee notes that current cannon artillery is
limited in range and capability in contested environments.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $5.0
million in RDA for PE 63464A to accelerate development and
testing of advanced guidance technology for the Hypervelocity
Projectile-Extended Range program.
Future Long Range Assault Aircraft
The budget request included $179.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 63465A
Future Vertical Lift Advanced Technology.
As one of the Army's six modernization priorities, the
Future Vertical Lift program is essentialto support future Army
operations. The committee notes that the Future Long Range
Assault Aircraft (FLRAA) is developing the next generation of
affordable vertical lift tactical assault and utility aircraft
for the Army.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $3.5
million in RDA for PE 63465A to support FLRAA program risk
reduction.
Future vertical lift 20mm chain gun
The budget request included $179.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA), for PE 63465A
for Future Vertical Lift Advanced Technology.
The committee notes that future vertical lift is one of
Army Future Command's six major modernization priorities.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $5.0
million in RDA for PE 63465A to support development and
demonstration of a 20mm medium caliber armament system for the
Future Armed Reconnaissance Aircraft platform.
Army unfunded requirements
In accordance with section 222a of title 10, United States
Code, the Chief of Staff of the Army submitted a list of
unfunded requirements. The committee recommends an additional
increase of about $71.5 million for items on these unfunded
requirements lists.
Development of anthropomorphic armor for female servicemembers
The budget request included $17.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 63827A
Soldier Systems--Advanced Development.
The committee notes that ill-fitting personal protective
equipment is a leading cause of injury among female
servicemembers, which anthropomorphic design and prototyping of
such equipment can help address.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.9 million in RDA
for PE 63827A Soldier Systems--Advanced Development, Project
VS-4--Soldier Protective Equipment, for anthropomorphic body
armor development and prototyping for female servicemembers.
Synthetic Training Environment
The budget request included $194.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 64121A
Synthetic Training Environment Refinement and Prototyping.
The committee recommends an additional $4.6 million in RDA
for PE 64121A for Multi-Sensor Terrain Data Capture and
Processing for Synthetic Training Environment to use a
commercial, off-the-shelf software system that can integrate
the needed data from multiple sensor types (video, imagery,
light detection and ranging) and process into high-resolution
georeferenced three dimensional terrain models.
Electric Light Reconnaissance Vehicle
The budget request included $2.1 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 64642A,
Light Tactical Wheeled Vehicles.
The Electric Light Reconnaissance Vehicle (eLRV) program
effectively generates, stores, and distributes power, providing
enhanced tactical and operational capabilities to the maneuver
reconnaissance formation while reducing reliance on fossil
fuels. The committee notes that the Chief of Staff of the Army
submitted an unfunded requirement to allow for the purchase of
prototypes to inform electrification performance parameters and
accelerate fielding the eLRV capability.
Therefore, the committee recommends an addition of $5.6
million in RDA for PE 64642A for the eLRV program.
Active Protection Systems for Bradley and Stryker
The budget request included $106.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 64852A
Suite of Survivability Enhancement Systems--EMD.
The committee supports an unfunded requirement that would
continue to advance ongoing efforts to develop active
protection systems (APS) for Bradley and Stryker vehicles.
The committee recommends an additional $21.0 million in RDA
for PE 64852A Suite of Survivability Enhancement Systems--EMD,
in project FE8 Vehicle Protection Suite, for further
development, characterization, and urgent material release of
hard-kill APS solutions for Bradley and Stryker combat
vehicles.
Cyber situational understanding
The budget request included $18.9 million in line number
131 of Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA),
for PE65041 for Defensive Cyber Tool Development.
The committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 million in RDA
for cyber situational understanding.
In the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283),
the committee expressed concern that the Army decided to
develop a new system for tactical-level cyber situational
understanding (CSU) instead of adapting the existing baseline
capability for the Joint Cyber Command and Control (JCC2)
program. That baseline is formulated on the technology
developed over many years by the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency under the PlanX program, and further
enhancements funded by the Strategic Capabilities Office under
the IKE program. The committee notes that using a common JCC2-
based system would provide interoperability and training
benefits. The committee directed the Army to conduct an
independent evaluation of the JCC2 program's ability to meet
the Army's CSU requirements. That evaluation indicated that it
would have been less costly to adapt JCC2 for the CSU
capability, but the Army asserts that, due to the sunk costs
already incurred on CSU, the cost to complete using the JCC2
baseline would be more expensive. The committee notes, however,
that the Army included a large amount of money in its estimate
for adapting JCC2 for engineering that significantly exceeds
what it expects to spend on the current path. The committee
directs the Army to develop a detailed breakdown of costs to
adapt JCC2 for Army CSU requirements, as well as to meet the
cyber command and control requirements for the Multi-Domain
Task Forces prior to obligation of fiscal year 2022 funding for
CSU.
Contract writing systems reduction
The budget request included $23.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 65047A
Contract Writing System.
The committee continues to be concerned about the
multiplicity of contract writing systems that are being
developed by the military services, without a clear plan for
standards or data interoperability and sharing requirements
that will drive better data analysis in the Department of
Defense. The committee is also concerned that there is no clear
plan for these systems to provide data to the Advana data
analytics platform being developed by the Chief Data Officer
and Undersecretary of Defense (Comptroller).
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $10.0
million in RDA, for PE 65047A.
CH-47 Chinook Cargo On/Off Loading System
The budget request included $52.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 67137A
Chinook Product Improvement Program.
The committee notes that integration of advanced ballistic
protection system technologies with a standardized
configuration cargo loading system provides a low cost weight
reduction opportunity.
The committee recommends an additional $8.0 million in RDA
PE 67137A Chinook Product Improvement Program for development
of the Chinook cargo on/off load system.
Chinook T55-714C engine certification and integration
The budget request included $52.4 million in line 195 of
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA), for PE
67137A Chinook Product Improvement Program.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million to
support the qualification planning, certification, and initial
integration of the enhanced CH-47 Chinook T55 engine.
Apache Future Development
The budget request included $10.1 million in line number
199 of Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA),
for PE 67145A Apache Future Development.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in
RDA for PE 67145A Apache Future Development to support
necessary engineering analysis to accelerate future
development.
Abrams tank modernization
The budget request included $211.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA) for PE 23735A
Combat Vehicle Improvement Programs (CVIP).
The committee notes the CVIP request includes $50.3 million
in Project 330, Abrams Tank Improvement Program (ATIP),
primarily focused on improving lethality of the M1A2 SEP
Version 4 Abrams tank. However, there is not funding for the
development of additional advanced technologies to
significantly reduce weight and increase mobility,
survivability and sustainability, and further improve
lethality.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $64.1
million in RDA for PE 23735A CVIP, Project 330, ATIP, toward
the development of improvements, including an unmanned turret,
autoloader, ammunition handling system, hydro-pneumatic
suspension, integrated active protection, and hybrid electric
drive.
Identity, credentialing and access management reduction--Army
The budget request included $15.7 million in line number
220 of Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army (RDA)
for PE 33140A Information Systems Security Program.
The committee is concerned about the lack of integrated
efforts to establish a common enterprise identity,
credentialing and access management (ICAM) solution across the
Department of Defense and encourages the Army to work with the
Defense Information Systems Agency in migrating its ICAM
approach to an enterprise solution. Therefore, the committee
recommends a decrease of $5.0 million in RDA for this program.
Navy
High-performance computation and data equipment
The budget request included $117.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDN) for PE 61103N
University Research Initiatives.
The committee notes that high-performance computing is a
strategic resource for economic competitiveness, scientific and
information technology leadership, and national security. Large
investments are being made globally into high-performance
computation resources to leverage innovations in artificial
intelligence, machine learning, and large computer models to
revolutionize nearly every area of science and engineering.
To support university research capabilities in national
security areas, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDN for PE 61103N for academic high-performance
computation and data equipment capabilities.
University research programs
The budget request included $117.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDN) for PE 61103N
Defense Research Sciences.
The committee recognizes it is crucial to adequately fund,
resource, and structure the Department of Defense to conduct
research, development, and testing activities for critical
emerging technologies to stay ahead of our adversaries, most
notably Russia and China. Resources must be devoted and
responsibly spent toward research and development in critical
sectors, including artificial intelligence, quantum computing,
hypersonics, directed energy, biotechnology, autonomy, cyber,
space, 5G, microelectronics, and fully networked command,
control, and communications technologies. The committee is
concerned that the balance of science and technology research
in the Navy is trending away from basic research and focusing
on more near-term applied research.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $30.0
million in RDN for PE 61103N to increase emphasis on the basic
research activities performed by the Navy to steer the
innovation of the Department for the future.
Graphene electro-active metamaterials
The budget request included $23.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDN) for PE 62114N
Power Projection Applied Research.
The committee notes that graphene-based electro-active
metamaterials' properties can be tuned in a broad range of
frequencies to meet specified performance requirements,
including to act as radar absorbing materials for defense
systems and platforms.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $3.0
million in RDN for PE 62114N for research on graphene electro-
active metamaterials.
Relative positioning of autonomous platforms
The budget request included $122.9 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDN) for PE 62123N
Force Protection Applied Research.
The committee notes that the Navy is developing unmanned
surface vehicles which can be supported by autonomous unmanned
aerial vehicles to provide long-range and long-endurance
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance and strike
capabilities. The committee notes that communication and
maneuvering between unmanned systems, as well as docking of
manned and unmanned vessels, is a complex problem that involves
understanding the relative motion and positioning of each
vehicle.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDN for PE 62123N to develop technologies to improve
control of the relative positioning of autonomous platforms.
Resilient innovative sustainable economies via university partnerships
The budget request included $122.9 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDN) for PE 62123N
Force Protection Applied Research.
The committee recognizes the challenges facing isolated
States, which limits their ability to develop research,
innovation, and technology bases to support national security
missions. The committee notes that academic research has led to
technological innovations that have contributed significantly
to national security and economic growth. The committee
believes that leveraging universities to increase industrial
diversification will support development of necessary economic
infrastructure and potentially lead to useful defense
technology and industrial capability.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in RDN for PE 62123N to support efforts to work with
universities on research, technology development, and
industrial expansion efforts, consistent with Navy
modernization priorities.
Anti-corrosion nanotechnologies
The budget request included $70.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDN) for PE 62236N
Warfighter Sustainment Applied Research.
The committee notes that the cost of corrosion on military
equipment and infrastructure is a universal problem that is
acute in the Asia-Pacific region.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $3.0
million in RDN for PE 62236N to accelerate technology
demonstration and show the feasibility of realizing operational
and cost benefits of employing usable nanotechnology surface
enhancements on military hardware and infrastructure.
Humanoid robotics research
The budget request included $70.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDN) for PE 62236N
Warfighter Sustainment Applied Research.
The committee recognizes the promise of autonomous legged
robotics for both dangerous and repetitive jobs on ships. In
particular, the Navy has identified shipboard disinfection and
a number of shipboard maintenance tasks as ideal candidates for
integrating the use of legged robots.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5
million in RDN for PE 62236N for research on the use of
humanoid robotics in unstructured environments.
Undersea vehicle research academic partnerships
The budget request included $57.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDN) for PE 62747N
Undersea Warfare Applied Research.
The committee notes the value of establishing strong
research and technology development partnerships between
academic institutions, industry, and the Department of Defense
to promote innovation in critical defense sectors.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $12.0
million in RDN for PE 62747N to support the expansion of
academic partnerships to support undersea vehicle research
activities. The committee supports these activities, including
a variety of research efforts ranging from fundamental research
to prototyping of novel undersea vehicle components and
systems.
Undersea warfare applied research
The budget request included $57.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDN) for PE 62747N
Undersea Warfare Applied Research.
The committee notes the importance of undersea warfare in
the National Defense Strategy and the efforts of peer
competitors to undercut the United States' current
technological advantage in the undersea domain.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in RDN for PE 62747N to support additional research to
modernize undersea warfare capabilities.
Navy and Marine Corps unfunded requirements
In accordance with section 222a of title 10, United States
Code, the Chief of Naval Operations and the Commandant of the
Marine Corps each submitted a list of unfunded requirements.
The committee recommends an additional increase of about $1.01
billion for items on these unfunded requirements lists.
Unmanned systems interoperability
The budget request included $224.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDN) for PE 63640M
U.S. Marine Corps Advanced Technology Demonstration.
The committee notes that the Department of Defense
``Unmanned Systems Integrated Roadmap for 2017-2042'' made a
number of recommendations for accelerating unmanned systems
capabilities by increasing interoperability and human-machine
collaboration.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an additional $5.0
million in RDN for PE 63640M to support efforts to enhance
unmanned systems interoperability and systems for providing
relevant data required for mission planning, mission rehearsal,
post mission assessment, and simulation.
Naval prototypes
The budget request included $133.8 million in Research,
Development, Testing, and Evaluation, Navy (RDN) for PE 63801N
Innovative Naval Prototypes Advanced Technology Development.
The committee is concerned about reductions to traditional
Navy basic research capabilities, the lack of investments in
Navy lab and warfare infrastructure, and the lack of
coordination between the growing number of prototyping
activities across the Department of Defense.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $20.0
million in RDN for PE 63801N to reduce funding for prototyping
projects with limited transition possibilities to Navy programs
of record.
Manned-Unmanned Experimentation
The budget request included $16.9 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDN), for PE 63128N
Unmanned Aerial Systems.
The committee supports the Marine Corps' efforts to develop
medium-altitude, long-endurance (MALE) manned-unmanned
experimentation (MUX) aircraft to begin operating in U.S. Indo-
Pacific Command by fiscal year 2023. The committee further
supports the development of a runway-independent capability for
MALE-MUX aircraft as a follow-on capability to support
Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0
million in RDN for PE 63128N Unmanned Aerial Systems for the
development, procurement, and testing of runway-independent
MALE-MUX prototypes.
Stratospheric balloon research
The budget request included $46.1 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDN) for PE 64378N
Naval Integrated Fire Control--Counter Air Systems Engineering.
The committee recognizes the increasing importance of
stratospheric balloons in command, control, communications,
computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance and
missile defense missions. The committee is concerned that, as
projects move from the Office of Secretary of Defense's Missile
Defeat Project to elsewhere in the Department, transition of
prior research will be insufficient. Specifically, the
committee is concerned that stratospheric balloon research
activities conducted by the Department still require testing
and evaluation activities before systems can transition to the
military services as a program of record.
Therefore, to support efforts to transition this
technology, the committee recommends an increase of $13.0
million in RDN for PE 64378N for stratospheric balloon
research.
Advanced Sensors Application Program
The budget request included no funding in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDN) for PE 64419N
Advanced Sensors Application Program.
The committee objects to the abrupt termination of this
program that has longstanding congressional sponsorship and
support.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in
RDN for PE 64419N in support of this program.
Contract writing systems reduction
The budget request included $243.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDN), for PE 65013N
Information Technology Development.
The committee continues to be concerned about the
multiplicity of contract writing systems that are being
developed by the military services, without a clear plan for
standards or data interoperability and sharing requirements
that will drive better data analysis in the Department of
Defense. The committee is also concerned that there is no clear
plan for these systems to provide data to the Advana data
analytics platform being developed by the Chief Data Officer
and Undersecretary of Defense (Comptroller).
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $10.0
million in RDN, for PE 65013N.
Strategic Weapon System Shipboard Navigation System Modernization
The budget request included $177.1 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDN), for PE 11221N
Strategic Sub & Weapons System Support.
The committee notes the importance of completing the
Velocity Fusion Development, accelerating gravimeter algorithm
development and integration, initiating Fleet Transition,
initiating Hydrophone Array Modernization, and establishing a
Dynamic Concept of Operations framework within the Strategic
Weapons System Shipboard Navigation Modernization program.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0
million in RDN, for PE 11221N for the Strategic Weapons System
Shipboard Navigation Modernization program.
Neural network algorithms on advanced processors
The budget request included $189.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy (RDN) for PE 24136N F/
A-18 Squadrons.
The committee supports the incorporation of artificial
intelligence (AI) to ensure continued relevancy of legacy
platforms.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDN for PE 24136N for AI algorithms hosted on new
hardware and to validate the suitability for warfighter
application.
Air Force
University research programs
The budget request included $162.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
61103F University Research Initiatives.
The committee recognizes it is crucial to adequately fund,
resource, and structure the Department of Defense to conduct
research, development, and testing activities for critical
emerging technologies to stay ahead of United States
adversaries, most notably Russia and China. Resources must be
devoted and responsibly spent toward research and development
in critical sectors including artificial intelligence, quantum
computing, hypersonics, directed energy, biotechnology,
autonomy, cyber, space, 5G, microelectronics, and fully
networked command, control, and communications technologies.
The committee is concerned that the balance of science and
technology research in the Air Force is trending away from
basic research and focusing on more near-term applied research.
As such, the committee recommends an increase of $30.0
million in RDAF for PE 61103F to increase emphasis on the basic
research activities performed by the Air Force to help set the
course of innovation of the Department for the future.
Continuous composites 3D printing
The budget request included $113.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
62102F Materials.
The committee notes that the development of state-of-the-
art composite additive manufacturing processes may enable major
cost reductions and increase the speed of delivery of new
systems into operational use.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $7.0
million in RDAF for PE 62102F for the development of additive
manufactured composites to advance hypersonics, space, and next
generation air, launch, and ground vehicles in support of the
National Defense Strategy.
High energy synchrotron X-ray research
The budget request included $113.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
62102F Materials.
The committee notes the value of research using high-energy
X-ray beamlines to support Air Force modernization needs. This
research enhances understanding of high performance materials
for tactical aircraft, metal fatigue processes, and materials
produced using additive manufacturing technologies, and
supports technical workforce development.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDAF for PE 62102F for high energy synchrotron X-ray
research.
Ground test and development of hypersonic engines
The budget request included $163.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
62201F Aerospace Vehicle Technologies.
The committee notes the key role of hypersonics
technologies in the Department of Defense's modernization
strategy and future force posture. The committee notes that a
barrier to the development and deployment of new hypersonic
engine technologies is the lack of engine test equipment and
infrastructure.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDAF for PE 62201F for investments in modern ground
test activities for hypersonic engines.
Hypersonic flight test services
The budget request included $163.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
62201F Aerospace Vehicle Technologies.
The committee supports the Air Force's efforts to design
and perform risk reduction demonstration testing in the
hypersonic environment while leveraging commercial hypersonic
flight test assets.
To accomplish this goal, the committee recommends an
increase of $5.0 million in RDAF for PE 62201F to support risk
reduction and technology maturation through the demonstration
of commercial hypersonic flight technologies to support the
advancement of reusable hypersonic systems.
Low-cost small turbine engine research
The budget request included $174.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
62203F Aerospace Propulsion.
The committee notes that the need for low-cost small
turbine engines is steadily increasing for use in cruise
missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Addressing both
emerging threats and near-peer competitors will likely dictate
the use of tactics, like swarming and mass attacks, to confuse
and overwhelm the defenses of potential adversaries.
Unfortunately, due to a lack of investment and a limited
industrial base, small engine technology and affordability have
evolved only minimally over the past three decades.
To increase the capabilities of small turbine engines, the
committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in RDAF for PE
62203F for low-cost small turbine engine research to support
flight test readiness activities, including airframe and engine
integration testing.
Skyborg
The budget request included $131.6 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
63032F Future AF Integrated Technology Demos.
The committee supports the Air Force's Skyborg program but
remains concerned regarding the rest of the Vanguard programs.
Specifically, the committee recommends that the Air Force
procure 12 more Valkyrie aircraft and encourages the Air Force
to complete the transition to the Advanced Aircraft Capability
Development activity.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $75.0
million in RDAF for PE 63032F Future AF Integrated Technology
Demos.
Air Force integrated technology demonstrations
The budget request include $131.6 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
63032F Future Air Force Integrated Technology Demonstrations.
The committee is concerned about the shift in emphasis of
Department of Air Force research activities from support of
early stage research that explores the frontiers of scientific
knowledge to create next generation capabilities, to a more
near-term focus that heavily emphasizes near-term delivery of
mature systems. This approach may lead to a hollowing of the
base of technological achievement that the Air Force has funded
and developed in universities, industry, and the Air Force
Research Laboratory that has resulted in the dominant air and
space capabilities that are a critical element of the U.S.
national security posture. In particular, the committee is
concerned that increased funding for Air Force Vanguard
programs are reducing resources available for more early stage
and cross-cutting research efforts. Further, the committee
notes that the Vanguard programs are not well coordinated with
programs of other services and Defense Agencies to reduce
duplication and leverage technological advances.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $77.9
million in RDAF for PE 63032F, of which $47.9 million is for a
reduction in rocket cargo efforts, and recommends that the Air
Force review its science and technology portfolio to ensure
adequate balance between near and long term efforts.
Unmanned Adversary Air
The budget request included $131.6 million in line number
17 of Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force
(RDAF), for PE 63032F Future AF Integrated Technology Demos.
The committee recognizes the importance of cost-effective
adversary training and supports the Air Force's efforts on
unmanned adversary air platforms to prototype and test the use
of unmanned, low-cost, fighter-representative aircraft.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $125.0
million in RDAF for PE 63032F to purchase low-cost unmanned
aircraft and to begin testing and integration into the
adversary air ecosystem.
B-52 engine pylon fairings increase
The budget request included $70.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
63211F Aerospace Technology Dev/Demo.
The committee notes that, where each of the eight engines
of a B-52 attach to the wing of the aircraft, there is a strong
aerodynamic shock that results in increased drag. Placement of
a fairing to smooth airflow at this juncture can reduce drag.
Specifically, initial computational fluid dynamics models
estimate a 2.5 percent fuel efficiency savings for B-52 engine
pylon fairings. Due to the simplicity of the fairings' design
and low cost, return on investment is less than 18 months. The
committee continues to support the Air Force's sound
investments in operational energy improvements and views the
cost and fuel saving benefits to warfighters as innovative
solutions to meeting the demands of the National Defense
Strategy.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in RDAF for PE 63211F for B-52 engine pylon fairings.
Hypersonics materials manufacturing
The budget request include $45.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
63680F Manufacturing Technology Program.
The committee notes the need to improve advanced materials
capabilities given the strength, weight, and heat resistance
requirements of hypersonic missiles and vehicles. Development
programs for hypersonic weapons and vehicles have a number of
material and manufacturing challenges, including the need to
produce large numbers of high-quality composite parts, improve
the machining of aerospace parts, and improve the strength of
materials made using additive manufacturing techniques.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in RDAF for PE 63680F for hypersonic weapon and vehicle
material manufacturing.
Sustainment and modernization research and development program
The budget request included $45.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
63680F Manufacturing Technology Program.
The committee notes that the Air Force logistics enterprise
may be able to lower life cycle costs through software
development processes and the application of data analytics and
artificial intelligence to Air Force business operations;
development of novel additive and advanced manufacturing
processes; and development and deployment of advanced materials
and high-performance coatings. Air Force sustainment missions
will also be enhanced by providing innovative research-based
education and workforce development programs targeting
challenge areas, particularly in the Air Force organic
industrial base.
Therefore, to support these activities, the committee
recommends an additional $7.0 million in RDAF, for PE 63680F
for sustainment research and development.
Advanced engine development
The budget request included $123.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
64004F Advanced Engine Development.
The committee supports the Air Force's request to continue
development of the advanced engine and acceleration of the
prototype and testing.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $30.0
million in RDAF for PE 64004F Advanced Engine Development.
Tactical Datalink Waveform
The budget request included $82.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
64006F, Department of the Air Force Technical Architecture
Design, Integration, and Evaluation.
The committee supports the Air Force's efforts to quickly
integrate and field resilient tactical datalink capability
across the joint force utilizing existing radios and leveraging
cryptographic modernization hardware to accelerate fielding.
The ability to connect sensors, shooters, and weapons across
multiple domains is a prerequisite to realizing the vision of
Joint All-Domain Command and Control.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $80.0
million in RDAF for PE 64006F to accelerate the Air Force's
efforts to integrate and field resilient datalink capability.
Automatic target recognition
The budget request included $23.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
64257F Advanced Technology and Sensors.
The committee supports the Air Force's acceleration of
automatic target recognition across multiple modalities as an
enabler for Joint All Domain Command and Control.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDAF for PE 64257F Advanced Technology and Sensors.
Academic technology transfer partnerships
The budget request included $15.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
64317F Technology Transfer.
The committee notes that this program captures and manages
intellectual property (IP) (e.g. patents and inventions)
developed by the Air Force and leads efforts to transfer IP to
the commercial sector to support transitioning technology to
the warfighter.
The committee recommends an increase of $7.5 million in
RDAF for PE 64317F to expand academic partnerships to support
Air Force technology transfer activities.
Air Force operational energy increases
The budget request included $343.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
64858F Tech Transition Program.
The committee notes that high fidelity computational fluid
dynamics modeling and data analysis show an expected 5 percent
efficiency increase when using KC-135 active winglets, which
would equate to roughly $30.0 million per year in fuel savings
based on the same amount of flying hours. Additionally, the
shape of turbine engine compressor blades degrade over time,
resulting in a fuel inefficiency. Improved compressor blade
technology, commonly used by commercial airlines and optimized
for an ideal balance of durability and fuel efficiency, allows
compressor blades to maintain their optimal shape for a longer
period of time. Engines with coated compressor blades can
achieve roughly 2 percent fuel efficiency and yield observable
net savings within 2 years. Cargo, tanker, and non-stealth
bomber aircraft account for roughly 60 percent of the Air
Force's total jet fuel consumption at about 1.2 billion gallons
per year. Blended wing body (BWB) airframes for these aircraft
from tube and wing BWB could yield a 30 percent increase in
range and payload capabilities. This would equate to annual
fuels savings of $900.0 million per year at current fuel
prices. Lastly, building off work done with KC-135s, a new
advanced winglet for the C-17 fleet could conservatively result
in a 2.5 percent efficiency over the current first generation
winglet. This would result in $25.0 million per year in fuel
savings with the same annual flying hours. The committee
continues to support the Air Force's sound investments in
operational energy improvements and views the cost and fuel
saving benefits to warfighters as innovative solutions to
meeting the demands of the National Defense Strategy.
Accordingly, the committee recommends the following
increases: $10.0 million for KC-135 winglets, $2.0 million for
engine compressor blade coatings, $15.0 million for BWB
prototype phase 1, and $5.0 million for C-17 active winglets
phase 1 in RDAF for PE 64858F Tech Transition Program.
Cold spray technologies
The budget request included $343.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
64858F Tech Transition Program.
The committee notes that a January 30, 2020, Government
Accountability Office (GAO) report, titled ``Military Depots:
DOD Can Benefit from Further Sharing of Best Practices and
Lessons Learned'' (GAO-20-116), cited the potential benefits of
the application of cold spray manufacturing technologies in
sustainment activities across the Department of Defense.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDAF for PE 64858F Tech Transition Program.
Coordination with private sector to protect against foreign malicious
cyber actors
The budget request included $242.5 million in line number
62 of Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force
(RDAF), for PE 36250F Cyber Operations Technology Support.
Elsewhere in this Act, the committee recommends a provision
that would require the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, to
establish a voluntary process for engaging with commercial
information technology and cybersecurity companies to explore
and develop methods of assistance or coordination to protect
against foreign malicious cyber actors.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in
RDAF PE 36250F to support this initiative.
Contract writing systems reduction
The budget request included $20.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
91410F Contracting Information Technology System.
The committee continues to be concerned about the
multiplicity of contract writing systems that are being
developed by the military services, without a clear plan for
standards or data interoperability and sharing requirements
that will drive better data analysis in the Department of
Defense. The committee is also concerned that there is no clear
plan for these systems to provide data to the Advana data
analytics platform being developed by the Chief Data Officer
and Undersecretary of Defense (Comptroller).
The committee recommends a decrease of $10.0 million in
RDAF for PE 91410F.
Air Force combat training ranges
The budget request included $24.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
64735F Combat Training Ranges.
The committee supports the Air Force's efforts to modernize
the combat training ranges to a level 3 or level 4 threat
representation.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $7.2
million in RDAF for PE 64735F Combat Training Ranges.
Degraded GPS live flight training
The budget request included $24.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
64735F Combat Training Ranges.
The committee supports the Air Force's efforts to modernize
the combat training ranges and support training for GPS denied
and degraded operations.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDAF for PE 64735F Combat Training Ranges.
Gulf test range enhancements
The budget request included $24.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
64735F Combat Training Ranges.
The committee supports the Air Force's efforts to modernize
the Gulf Test Range and ensure it is capable of supporting the
full spectrum of development testing required for fifth and
sixth generation weapon technology-based systems, including
testing of hypersonic and autonomous systems, which are
identified as critically important to current defense strategy.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDAF for PE 64735F Combat Training Ranges.
Future tanker reduction
The budget request included $73.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
41221F KC-46A Tanker Squadrons.
The committee is concerned that the Air Force's request
looks to begin development of a tanker replacement prior to the
KC-46 being fully operational.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $6.0
million in RDAF for PE 41221F KC-46A Tanker Squadrons.
U.S. Strategic Command Nuclear Command, Control and Communication
Enterprise Center
The budget request included $25.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF), for PE
33255F for Command, Control, Communication, and Computers
(C4)--STRATCOM.
The committee notes the importance of developing new
architectures and processes for a next generation Nuclear
Command, Control and Communications system and the importance
of the Rapid Engineering Architecture Collaboration Hub in
achieving these goals.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDAF for PE 33255F for the Rapid Engineering
Architecture Collaboration Hub.
F-35 continuous capability development and delivery
The budget request included $985.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
64840F F-35 C2D2 [continuous capability development and
delivery].
The committee supports the robust modernization program and
investment in critical test assets and infrastructure to
support the size and the scale of the F-35 fleet.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0
million in RDAF for PE 64840F F-35 C2D2.
Foreign material acquisition and exploitation
The budget request included $71.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
65117F Foreign Material Acquisition and Exploitation.
The committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 million in RDAF
for PE 65117F Foreign Material Acquisition and Exploitation.
Over The Horizon Radar
The budget request included $99.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
12412F North Warning System.
The committee notes the importance of having a capability
to detect approaches to North America from the Northeast,
Northwest, and Western directions. This is also a U.S. Northern
Command unfunded requirement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $25.1
million in RDAF for PE 12412F for the development of the over
the horizon radar capability.
Polar Over the Horizon Radar
The budget request included $99.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
12412F North Warning System.
The committee notes the importance of having a capability
to detect approaches from the far North of over 70 degrees
latitude for Russian long-range aviation.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDAF for PE 12412F for the development of the Polar
Over The Horizon Radar capability for far North detection.
Additive manufacturing
The budget request included $103.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
27268F Aircraft Engine Component Improvement Program.
The committee supports the Air Force's effort to leverage
additive manufacturing.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDAF for PE 27268F Aircraft Engine Component
Improvement Program.
Identity, credentialing, and access management reduction--Air Force
The budget request included $8.0 million in line 242 of
Research, Development, Test, & Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF),
for PE33140F Information Systems Security Program.
The committee is concerned about the lack of integrated
efforts to establish a common enterprise identity,
credentialing and access management (ICAM) solution across the
Department of Defense and encourages the Air Force to work with
the Defense Information Systems Agency in migrating its ICAM
approach to an enterprise solution.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.0
million in RDAF for this program.
Weather forecasting using machine learning
The budget request included $26.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
35111F Weather Service.
The committee notes the importance of using machine
learning for improved weather forecasting and that forecasting
and related geospatial data will support the Department of
Defense's ability to exploit timely, accurate, and relevant
weather information anytime and everywhere on the globe.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $1.0
million in RDDW for PE 35111F for machine learning applied to
weather forecasting.
Battery cycle life improvements
The budget request included $175.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Space Force (RDSF), for PE
1206601SF Space Technology.
The committee supports the Space Force's request to improve
battery cycle life.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDSF, for PE 1206601SF Space Technology.
Radiation hardened microelectronics
The budget request included $175.8 million in funding in
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Space Force (RDSF)
for PE 1206601SF for Space Technology.
The committee notes the importance of developing
capabilities for hardened microelectronics to withstand the
radiation of a space environment.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDSF for PE 1206601SF for the development of
microelectronics to withstand radiation in space.
Air Force and Space Force unfunded requirements
In accordance with section 222a of title 10, United States
Code, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force and the Chief of
Space Operations each submitted a list of unfunded
requirements. The committee recommends an additional increase
of about $728.0 million for items on these unfunded
requirements lists.
Joint Space Rapid Experimentation and Demonstration
The budget request included $76.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Space Force (RDSF), for PE
1206616SF Space Advanced Technology Development and
Demonstration.
The committee notes the importance of accelerating
technology demonstrations and rapid prototyping and leveraging
non-traditional space industry partners in order to produce
fully informed joint space requirements by U.S. Space Command.
As a result, this is also a Space Command unfunded requirement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in RDSF, for PE 1206616SF Space Advanced Technology
Development and Demonstration.
Maui Optical Site
The budget request included $123.3 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Space Force (RDSF) for PE
1206425SF Space Situation Awareness Systems.
The committee notes the critical importance of deep space
domain awareness performed at the Maui Optical Site. This is
also a Space Force unfunded requirement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $7.0
million in RDSF for PE 1206425SF Space Situation Awareness
Systems that furthers the capability of the Maui optical
telescope and supporting systems.
Tactically Responsive Launch
The budget request included $17.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Space Force (RDSF) for PE
1206860SF for Rocket Systems Launch Program (SPACE).
The committee notes the importance of developing
capabilities and concepts of operations based on those
capabilities for the Tactically Responsive Launch.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million for RDSF PE 1206860SF for the development of
technologies and concepts of operations based on the
technologies for the Tactically Responsive Launch.
Digital core services for distributed space test and training
The budget request included $18.1 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Space Force (RDSF) for PE
1203174SF Space Innovation, Integration and Rapid Technology
Development.
The committee notes the critical importance of distributed
space test and training range capability across various test
beds. This is also a Space Force unfunded requirement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0
million in RDSF for PE 1203174SF for Digital Core Services that
enable distributed, configurable enterprise test and training
activities, and lowers operational risk and facilities
integration of test services at the Nevada Test and Training
Range.
Microelectronics research network
The budget request included $193.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDAF) for PE
62204F Aerospace Sensors.
The committee recommends an increase of $250.0 million in
RDAF for PE 62204F to support the establishment of the network
for microelectronics research established under the Creating
Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors Act (CHIPS Act),
Title XCIX, section 9903(b) of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public
Law 116-283). The committee notes the need to create
partnerships between academic researchers, industry, and users
of advanced microelectronics to drive the development of new
dual use microelectronics capabilities which will be produced
domestically. This will reduce the Department of Defense's
reliance on the failed trusted foundry models that have been
unsuccessfully attempted in the past. The network will also be
able to better reflect activities designed to reflect future
requirements of the military services for microelectronics
systems.
Defense Wide
Defense research sciences
The budget request included $395.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
61101E Defense Research Sciences.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in
RDDW for PE 61101E for Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency-funded university research activities.
Defense Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research
The budget request included $39.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
6110D8Z Basic Research Initiatives.
The committee recognizes the importance of the Defense
Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research
(DEPSCoR). The program helps increase the number of university
researchers and improve the capabilities of institutions of
higher education in eligible jurisdictions to perform
competitive research relevant to the Department of Defense.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in RDDW for PE 6110D8Z for DEPSCoR.
Minerva management and social science research
The budget request included $39.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
61110D8Z Basic Research Initiatives.
The committee notes that the Minerva Research Initiative
serves as the Department of Defense's signature management and
social science basic research program that funds university-led
teams to address problems of strategic importance to the
Department of Defense. The National Academies of Sciences,
Engineering, and Medicine concluded that Minerva's
accomplishments have made important contributions to national
security. Additionally, the National Academies stated that
Minerva's research has yielded a wealth of knowledge to support
activities under the National Defense Strategy.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $22.5
million in RDDW for PE 61110D8Z for the Minerva Research
Initiative.
Traumatic brain injury research
The budget request included $76.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
61117E Basic Operational Medical Research Science.
The committee notes that numerous servicemembers have been
diagnosed with traumatic brain injuries over the last 15 years.
These injuries are associated with a variety of long-term
effects, including cognitive impairment, psychiatric disorders,
neurodegenerative diseases, and chronic traumatic
encephalopathy.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDDW for PE 61117E for traumatic brain injury
research.
Workforce development for defense laboratories
The budget request included $112.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
61120D8Z National Defense Education Program.
The committee recognizes that a pipeline of highly educated
and trained engineering students is needed to meet the current
and future needs of the defense research laboratory workforce.
As such, the committee expects that the creation of a robust
workforce pipeline, with a focus on diverse students engaged in
advanced technology development projects intended to support
fielding of systems for the warfighter, would be beneficial to
Department of Defense (DOD) modernization efforts. This may
include placing selected students in DOD laboratories that
align with their academic studies to participate in relevant
research programs.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $1.5
million in RDDW for PE 61120D8Z and encourages the Secretary of
Defense to collect data to inform decisions on the value of
expanding the program over time.
Quantum computing acceleration
The budget request included $430.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
62303E for Information and Communications Technology.
The committee heard testimony from non-government
technology experts who believe that the field of quantum
computing is mature enough to warrant increased investment with
the goal of developing functional and useful computing systems
based on quantum computing within the next 5 to 10 years.
The committee supports this initiative and recommends an
additional $100.0 million in RDDW for PE 62303E for
acceleration of the deployment of large-scale quantum computing
systems to help ensure the United States remains the world
leader in quantum computing capabilities. The committee directs
the Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
to use this increased funding to make one or more large awards
to entities who present credible plans for development of
functioning large scale quantum computing systems. The
committee directs the Director to ensure that systems developed
under this effort are available for use for both military and
commercial applications.
High speed flight experiment testing
The budget request included $21.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
63180C Advanced Research.
The committee notes the importance of developing the
ability to test interceptors for the defeat of hypersonic
missiles using a rocket-based experimental approach for flight
experiments for key high-speed technologies.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million for RDDW for PE 63180C for high speed flight testing
using a rocket-based experimental approach for flight
experiments for key high-speed technologies.
Certification-based workforce training programs for manufacturing
The budget request included $134.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
63680D8Z Defense-Wide Manufacturing Science and Technology
Program.
The committee notes that the National Science and
Technology Council's ``Strategy for American Leadership in
Advanced Manufacturing'' has a strategic objective to ``attract
and grow tomorrow's manufacturing workforce.'' The committee
notes that priorities for this objective are manufacturing-
focused foundational science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics education; manufacturing engineering education; and
industry and academia partnerships.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDDW for PE 63680D8Z to support partnerships between
manufacturing innovation institutes, industry, academia, and
government to establish certification-based workforce training
programs for manufacturing.
Cybersecurity for industrial control systems
The budget request included $134.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
63680D8Z Defense-Wide Manufacturing Science and Technology
Program.
The committee believes that it is important to study the
cybersecurity vulnerabilities of industrial and facility-
related control systems, such as those used on military
installations. It is also important to expand the scope of
current academic efforts to work with leading Federal
laboratories on cybersecurity training and advanced control
system technology implementation, especially in the area of
virtual reality-enabled experimentation.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDDW for PE 63680D8Z for cybersecurity of industrial
control systems.
Data analytics and visual system
The budget request included $134.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense Wide (RDDW) for PE
63680D8Z Defense-Wide Manufacturing Science and Technology
Program.
The committee notes that the National Science and
Technology Council's ``Strategy for American Leadership in
Advanced Manufacturing'' has a strategic objective to ``capture
the future of intelligent manufacturing systems.''
To support this objective, the committee recommends an
increase of $3.0 million in RDDW for PE 63680D8Z to support the
development and deployment of data analytics and visual systems
to support advanced manufacturing.
Integrated silicon-based lasers
The budget request included $134.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
63680D8Z Defense-Wide Manufacturing Science and Technology
Program.
The committee notes the importance of quantum computing and
advance electronics to defense modernization priorities and the
role that silicon-based optoelectronics will play in modern
defense systems. The committee supports efforts to mature
integrated silicon-based lasers for use in national security
critical applications.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5
million in RDDW for PE 63680D8Z for improving the manufacturing
of high-performance, low-cost integrated silicon-based lasers.
High performance computing-enabled large-scale advanced manufacturing
The budget request included $37.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense Wide (RDDW) for PE
63680S Manufacturing Technology Program.
The committee notes that rapid prototyping is important as
a tool to both speed defense development and acquisition
processes as well as a means to improve outcomes through
continuous experimentation. The committee notes that advanced
computational resources can be applied to improve the fidelity
of early-stage designs while simultaneously taking advantage of
advanced manufacturing processes to speed prototype development
and testing.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $4.0
million in RDDW for PE 63680S to support the development of
high performance computing-enabled large-scale advanced
manufacturing.
Steel performance initiative
The budget request included $37.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
63680S Manufacturing Technology Program.
The committee notes that China is the world's largest
national steel producer and user, while the United States ranks
fourth, after China, India, and Japan. The committee notes that
the failure to consistently invest in steel technology for
advanced weapons systems threatens U.S. leadership in
commercial steel technology and defense equipment performance.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDDW for PE 63680S to continue efforts to support
steel research to increase domestic production capacity and
increased domestic production capacity in steel.
Artificial intelligence research activities
The budget request included $584.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
63766E Network-Centric Warfare Technology.
The committee recommends an increase of $100.0 million in
RDDW for PE 63766E to support further development of artificial
intelligence capabilities to help maintain United States
technological superiority over China.
Deep water active technologies
The budget request included $584.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
63766E Network-Centric Warfare Technology.
The committee notes that the Navy and the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency are collaborating on the development
of deployable active sonar nodes and advanced communications
systems to improve operational situational awareness.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDDW, for PE 63766E to support transition of such
technologies to the Navy.
Sensor technology
The budget request included $294.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
63767E Sensor Technology.
The committee recommends a decrease of $35.0 million in
RDDW for PE 63767E to reduce new program starts.
The committee directs the Director of the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency to review these programs for technical
merit, military value, coordination with other service and
Defense Agency activities, and likelihood of transition into
operational use or service acquisition programs.
Survivability Planning and Intercept Evaluation Tool
The budget request included $277.9 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
63881C Ballistic Missile Defense Terminal Defense Segment.
The committee notes the importance of developing,
designing, and testing a new Survivability Planning and
Intercept Evaluation Tool architecture that will deploy to the
Missile Defense Agency's classified network virtual enclave to
support missile defense analysis.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million for RDDW for PE 63881C for the Survivability Planning
and Intercept Evaluation Tool.
Strategic capabilities research and prototyping
The budget request included $716.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
64250D8Z Advanced Innovative Technologies.
The committee notes that, at the direction of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92), the Secretary of Defense established cross functional
teams to support the efforts of the Director of the Strategic
Capabilities Office (SCO). These teams are focused on improving
the technical review of SCO projects and supporting the
transition of successful SCO projects into acquisition programs
or operational use. The committee notes that the SCO is
performing important research and prototyping activities,
particularly in the development of joint capabilities and in
supporting cybersecurity missions. The committee notes that a
number of SCO projects still reflect a lack of technical rigor
or clear transition pathways and, in some cases, appear to be
duplicating efforts in the military services and defense
agencies.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $100.0
million in RDDW for PE 64250D8Z and directs the Secretary of
Defense and Director of the SCO to engage the cross-functional
teams in continuously reviewing the SCO portfolio--including
the Avatar, Sirena, Eclipse, and Shawshank projects--to ensure
their technical merit and operational impact, coordination with
other research and development programs, and to support the
development of transition pathways into acquisition programs or
operational use.
Increasing manufacturing readiness level for thermionic energy
harvesting technology
The budget request included $716.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
64250D8Z Advanced Innovative Technologies.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in
RDDW for PE 64250D8Z to raise the manufacturing readiness level
(MRL) of thermionic energy harvesting technology from MRL 3 to
MRL 7.
The committee notes that the Strategic Capabilities Office
(SCO) in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering has funded the successful development,
prototyping, and demonstration of thermionic energy harvesting
technology able to generate electric power at ambient
temperatures. The committee believes that energy densities
achieved in prototype devices are impressive. The critical next
step is to develop scalable and cost-effective manufacturing
processes at optimum feature sizes. The committee directs the
SCO to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees biannually from the date of the submission of the
fiscal year 2023 budget request until program completion or the
end of calendar year 2023.
Joint affordable kill chain closure program
The budget request included $103.6 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
64331D8Z Rapid Prototyping Program.
The committee recommends a decrease of $50.0 million in
RDDW for PE 64331D8Z due to efforts redundant to the Joint
Affordable Kill Chain Closure program.
Homeland Defense Radar--Hawaii
The budget request did not include funding in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW), for PE
64672C Homeland Defense Radar--Hawaii (HDR-H).
The committee notes the importance of having this phased
array radar to protect the Homeland, given the configuration
and distance of radars in the Pacific relative to existing
threats. This is also a U.S. Indo-Pacific Command unfunded
requirement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $76.0
million in RDDW for PE 64672C for the development of the
Homeland Defense Radar--Hawaii. Elsewhere in this Act $9.0
million is authorized for military construction planning and
design for this radar.
Joint All-Domain Command and Control experimentation
The budget request included $17.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for
PE64826J Joint C5 Capability Development, Integration and
Interoperability Assessments.
The committee notes the importance of prototyping,
experimentation, and integration activities to advance the
development, transition, fielding, and employment of
technologies and concepts of operation developed by the
services and Department of Defense science and technology
community in support of Joint All-Domain Command and Control
(JADC2). The committee believes that additional funds are
necessary to accelerate the work of the JADC2 Cross-Functional
Team.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0
million, for a total of $42.4 million, in RDDW for PE64826J for
JADC2 experimentation to help support the objectives of the
Pacific and European Deterrence Initiatives.
Laser communication ground terminals
The budget request included $636.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
1206410SDA for Space Technology Development and Prototyping.
The committee notes the importance of developing high speed
anti-jam communications ground terminals and the utility of
lasers for such resilient communications systems.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in RDDW for PE 1206410SDA for laser communication
ground terminals.
Space laser communications
The budget request included $636.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
1206410SDA Space Technology Development and Prototyping.
The committee notes the importance of developing high-
speed, anti-jam communications in space with lasers.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0
million in RDDW for PE 1206410SDA for laser communications in
space.
Wave glider development
The budget request included $550.1 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
64940D8Z Central Test and Evaluation Investment Development.
The committee notes the importance of at-sea ranges to
develop new surface and undersea warfare systems and
technologies.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million in RDDW for PE 64940D8Z to expand the prototype
integration and modification of wave gliders to support real-
time collection and exchange of tactical signals used during
range test events as well as increase the capacity of at-sea
ranges.
Systems engineering
The budget request included $40.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
65142D8Z Systems Engineering.
The committee notes that numerous independent and internal
assessments have highlighted the role that poor systems
engineering practices play in contributing to program technical
failures, cost and schedule overruns, and an inability of
innovative technologies to transition into programs of record
or operational use. These challenges continue to persist
despite the resources committed over a number of years by the
Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to
support systems engineering activities. The committee directs
the Undersecretary to review ongoing systems engineering
activities within the services, Defense Agencies, and the
Office of the Secretary of Defense, and to develop a
comprehensive strategy for the coordinated application of
limited resources and personnel to develop more systems
engineering technical capabilities to support modernization
activities under the National Defense Strategy. Until that
analysis and strategy are developed, the committee is concerned
that requested systems engineering activities are uncoordinated
and disconnected from the real technical challenges facing the
Department of Defense.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $15.0
million in RDDW for PE 65142D8Z for systems engineering
activities.
Technical information services
The budget request included $61.5 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
65801KA Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC).
The committee notes that the Department of Defense still
struggles with the collection, analysis, and use of technical
information to support operational missions, acquisition
programs, and research activities. These challenges remain
despite revolutionary advances in data analytics made in the
commercial sector and an increased emphasis on data use by the
Department of Defense. A May 2021 memo from the Deputy
Secretary of Defense, which directed a set of actions to
accelerate the Department's enterprise data activities,
manifested the Department's commitment to improving data
analytics. The committee is concerned that despite significant
resources being applied to DTIC activities and contractors, the
organization is not clearly linked in with the overall data
strategy and activities of the Department. The committee also
notes that the Department has yet to complete the independent
assessment of DTIC activities mandated by the conference report
(H. Rept. 116-617) accompanying the William M. (Mac) Thornberry
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public
Law 116-283).
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $50.0
million in RDDW for PE 65801KA.
Rare earth element separation technologies
The budget request included $58.2 million for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) in PE
67210D8Z for Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment Support.
The committee notes that the January 2021 ``Industrial
Capabilities Report to Congress,'' required by section 2504 of
title 10, United States Code, highlighted the challenges that
the Department of Defense faces in obtaining reliable and
secure sources of rare earth elements for defense systems.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $7.5
million in RDDW for PE 67210D8Z to accelerate the application
of cost-effective and commercially viable rare earth element
separation technologies to support achieving U.S. independence
from China suppliers.
Demonstration program on domestic production of rare earth elements
from coal byproducts
The budget request included $58.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
67210D8Z Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment Support
(IBAS).
Elsewhere in this Act, the committee recommends a provision
that would authorize a temporary program to demonstrate the
feasibility of separating critical minerals and rare earth
elements from coal byproducts and acid mine drainage for the
purpose of supplementing the Department of Defense's domestic
supply of critical minerals. The provision includes $3.0
million to fund this effort. The committee understands that
multiple higher learning institutions have demonstrated this
technology to date at a small scale. The committee's intent is
for such a technology to produce at least 1.5 tons of rare
earth elements per year and an equal amount of cobalt. Ideally,
the full rate capacity would recover between 18 and 21 tons of
rare earth elements per year. Lastly, the committee directs the
Department to consult with the Department of Energy's National
Energy Technology Lab as much as possible to avoid any
duplication and incorporate any lessons learned to the maximum
extent possible.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in RDDW for PE 67210D8Z for IBAS for the coal byproduct
demonstration program.
Digital manufacturing
The budget request included $58.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
67210D8Z Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment Support.
The committee notes that the Department of Defense's
manufacturing innovation institutes are well poised to promote
the development of innovative technologies across the defense
industrial base by transitioning manufacturing technologies to
major defense contractors.
The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in
RDDW for PE 67210D8Z to assist with transition costs and
implementation of advanced digital manufacturing technologies
to acquisition programs and the defense industrial base.
Industrial skills training
The budget request includes $58.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
67210D8Z Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment Support.
The committee notes that there is a need to foster greater
pathways from educational institutions to the defense
industrial base. The committee further notes the need for a
coordinated, multi-level effort to expand training facilities,
growing the throughput of both high school and adult training
programs; implement programs to recruit middle school students
into pipelines; more effectively market advanced technical
trades; and create equity and opportunity for underserved
populations.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in
RDDW for PE 67210D8Z to improve industrial skills training
efforts to support defense acquisition programs and the defense
industrial base.
Defense industrial skills and technology training systems
The budget request included $58.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
67210D8Z Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment Support.
The committee notes that the defense industrial base
workforce requires modernized skills to augment traditional
trade artisan expertise, including robotic programming and
operations to increase automation, digitization of work, and
increased use of virtual environments.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in
RDDW for PE 67210D8Z to continue efforts to enhance defense
industrial skills and technology training to support the
National Defense Strategy.
Submarine construction workforce training pipeline
The budget request included $58.2 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
67210D8Z Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment Support.
The committee notes that over the next decade, the
submarine shipbuilding industry must hire at least 18,000 new
skilled workers to support the production of the Columbia-class
ballistic missile submarine and the continued construction of
the Virginia-class submarine. The submarine industry has worked
closely with State and local governments, community colleges,
high schools, and community-based non-profits for the past
several years to establish new training pipelines to support
these increased hiring needs. Thus far, such pipeline training
programs have placed more than 2,500 people in submarine
industry jobs.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $21.0
million in RDDW for PE 67210D8Z to increase the throughput of
these pipelines and to expand them into additional States in
order to more adequately respond to the hiring demand.
Workforce transformation cyber initiative pilot program
The budget request included $49.2 million for Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW), for PE
33140D8Z Information Systems Security Program.
The committee supports the National Security Agency (NSA)
National Cryptologic School pilot program to enable workforce
transformation certificate-based courses on cybersecurity and
artificial intelligence that are offered by Center of Academic
Excellence (CAE) universities. The committee understands that
this pilot program will develop courses and curricula with
technology partners and also provide funding for select NSA CAE
universities to offer these courses and receive tuition
reimbursement for participation in the courses.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0
million in RDDW for PE 33140D8Z for the workforce
transformation cyber initiative pilot program.
Maritime scalable effects acceleration
The budget request included $78.6 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
1160431BB Warrior Systems.
The committee supports prioritization of resources to
address capability gaps, particularly those that ensure U.S.
Special Operations Forces maintain superiority relative to near
peer competitors, and notes that the Commander, U.S. Special
Operations Command (SOCOM) has identified the acceleration of
maritime scalable effects as an unfunded requirement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $4.2
million in RDDW for PE 1160431BB for acceleration of SOCOM
maritime scalable effects.
Information Systems Security Program
The budget request included $423.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
33140G Information Systems Security Program of the National
Security Agency.
The committee recommends a decrease of $10.0 million in
RDDW for PE 33140G Information Systems Security Program.
Rapid Innovation Program
The budget request included $115.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
63338D8Z Defense Modernization and Prototyping.
The committee recommends an increase of $75.0 million in PE
63338D8Z for the Rapid Innovation Program.
The committee notes that this program has been used to
successfully transition research programs, including those
funded under the Small Business Innovation Research program,
into formal acquisition programs and operational use.
Joint test and evaluation
The budget request included $42.6 million in line number 3
of Operational Test and Evaluation (OTE) for PE 65814OTE
Operational Test Activities and Analyses.
The committee recommends an additional $20.0 million in OTE
for PE 65814OTE for the Joint Test and Evaluation program.
The committee notes that this program funds multi-service
projects, coordinated with the Joint Staff, appropriate
combatant commanders, and the services, in order to provide
non-materiel solutions that improve: joint interoperability of
service systems, technical and operational concepts;
development and validation of joint test methodologies; and
test data for validating models, simulations, and test beds.
Acquisition Innovation Research Center
The budget request included $4.6 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
65151D8Z Studies and Analysis Support--OSD.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for
the Acquisition Innovation Research Center to continue
acquisition research activities authorized under section 2361a
of title 10, United States Code.
Domestic Comparative Testing Program
The budget request included $25.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
63133D8Z Foreign Comparative Testing.
The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million for
the Domestic Comparative Testing Program to support testing of
advanced commercial technologies for possible insertion into
acquisition programs, as authorized under section 882 of the
William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283).
Artificial intelligence applied research activities
The budget request included $430.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
62303E Information and Communications Technology.
The committee recommends an increase of $200.0 million in
RDDW for PE 62303E to support further development of artificial
intelligence capabilities to help maintain the United States'
technological superiority over China.
Pilot program on public-private partnerships with internet ecosystem
companies to detect and disrupt adversary cyber operations
The budget request included $423.7 million in line number
220 for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-
wide (RDDW) for PE 33140G Information Systems Security Program
(ISSP).
Elsewhere in this Act, the committee recommends a provision
that would require the Secretary of Defense to establish and
commence a pilot program to assess the feasibility and
advisability of entering into voluntary public-private
partnerships with internet ecosystem companies to facilitate
actions by such companies to discover and disrupt the use of
the platforms, systems, services, and infrastructure of such
companies by malicious cyber actors.
The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million in
RDDW for the ISSP to support this initiative.
Biomedical technologies
The budget request included $108.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for
62115E Biomedical Technology.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in
RDDW for PE 62115E Biomedical Technology.
Information & communications technology
The budget request included $430.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for
62303E Information & Communications Technology.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in
RDDW for PE 62303E Information & Communications Technology.
Materials & biological technology
The budget request included $317.0 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
62715E Materials & Biological Technology.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in
RDDW for PE 62715E Materials & Biological Technology.
Electronics technology
The budget request included $430.4 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
62716E Electronics Technology.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in
RDDW for PE 62716E Electronics Technology.
Advanced electronics technology
The budget request included $116.7 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
63739E Advanced Electronics Technology.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in
RDDW for PE 63739E Advanced Electronics Technology.
Command, control, and communications systems
The budget request included $251.8 million in Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for
63760E Command, Control, and Communications Systems.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in
RDDW for PE 63760E Command, Control, and Communications
Systems.
Funding support for National Security Agency Defense Industrial Base
cybersecurity activities
The budget request included $423.7 million in line number
220, Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-wide
(RDDW) for PE 33140G for the Information Systems Security
Program (ISSP).
Section 1648 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) required the Department of
Defense (DOD) to develop a comprehensive framework to enhance
the cybersecurity of the defense industrial base. Although DOD
initially focused too narrowly on the Cybersecurity Maturity
Model Certification program, DOD now recognizes that it must
address additional elements of the broader framework, and the
National Security Agency's (NSA) newly re-established
Cybersecurity Directorate must play an increased role.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0
million in RDDW for the NSA ISSP program to enhance defense
industrial base cybersecurity.
Fifth Generation Wireless Network Technology
The budget request included $374.7 million in Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDDW) for PE
64011D8Z Next Generation Information Communications Technology.
This program element funds the acceleration of fifth generation
(5G) wireless networking technology, both for at-scale
prototyping and experimentation of advanced dual-use
applications, and to mature and commoditize Open Radio Access
Network virtualization technology. This program was initiated
by congressional action in the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2020 (Public Law 116-93).
The budget request also included $22.9 million in RDDW, PE
62230D8Z for Defense Technology Innovation, which funds
technology innovation for sixth generation (6G) and beyond
wireless networks.
The committee is encouraged by the Department of Defense's
(DOD) 5G Strategy and associated Implementation Plan, which
reflect the clear recognition of the critical role that the 5G
ecosystem plays in U.S. military and economic competitiveness.
The committee believes that DOD's 12 experimental sites and
associated use cases present a uniquely valuable learning
environment that will accelerate 5G advancement, to the benefit
of both warfighters and U.S. citizens. The ability to rapidly
develop and employ prototypes, at scale, offers an unparalleled
resource to the nation, and creates a bridge between rapidly
advancing basic research and production that will continue to
be an essential link in the cycle of wireless technology
innovation that the U.S. can, and must, lead. The committee
expects that any departure from the recently issued strategy
and implementation plan will be carefully considered, and that
DOD will consult with the congressional defense committees
prior to making any significant departures from the 5G Strategy
and associated Implementation Plan.
The committee is concerned that the fiscal year 2022 budget
request for 5G represents a significant decline from the
enacted fiscal year 2021 budget level. The committee believes
that these activities need to be enhanced rather than scaled
back. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $100.0
million in RDDW for PE 64011D8Z for 5G acceleration activities
and an increase of $50.0 million in RDDW for PE 62230D8Z for 6G
and beyond technology development.
Defense-wide Research and Development unfunded requirements
In accordance with section 222a of title 10 United States
Code, the service chiefs and combatant commanders each
submitted a list of unfunded requirements. The committee
recommends an additional increase of nearly $398.6 million for
Defense-wide Research and Development items on these unfunded
requirements lists.
Items of Special Interest
Advanced engine development
The committee continues to support adaptive cycle engine
research and development and encourages the Department of
Defense (DOD) to transition this technology within the Advance
Engine Technology Program (AETP) into engineering and
manufacturing development activities at the soonest
opportunity. Fighter propulsion is one of the few areas in
which the United States maintains a clear advantage over near-
peer adversaries, specifically China and its threat to the
Indio-Pacific region. The F-35 will be one of the key elements
of the front-line fighter forces of the military services and
U.S. allies and partners for decades to come. Failure to
develop an adaptive cycle engine and make it available for
production on the F-35 would constitute a missed opportunity to
capitalize on more than $4.0 billion in research and
development and open a door for U.S. adversaries to overtake
fielded engine technology. The committee recognizes the
importance of maintaining a strong industrial base,
competition, and the role adaptive engine technology could play
in supporting the National Defense Strategy.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide, as part of the Department's fiscal year 2023
budget submission, details of an acquisition strategy and a
plan for an engineering and manufacturing development (EMD)
program to transition adaptive cycle engines into the F-35. The
acquisition strategy shall include at least one course of
action that would provide for executing an EMD contact in
fiscal year 2023.
Additionally, in order to preserve critical engineering and
manufacturing resources, and preserve momentum toward an
affordable EMD program, the committee recommends additional
funding in fiscal year 2022 for use in continued progress
toward maturation and risk-reduction of adaptive cycle engines
for the F-35. The Air Force should emphasize support for
achieving the AETP goals of an acquisition-level product design
consistent with the Adaptive Engine Requirements Document
statement of requirements and testing prototype engines that
validate those designs.
Anti-malarial preventative measures
The committee is concerned about the Department of
Defense's reductions to investments in research and development
of vaccines to prevent malaria. Since malaria remains the top
infectious disease threat to servicemembers in the Indo-Pacific
Command and Africa Command areas of responsibilities, a
reduction in funding for anti-malarial preventive measures will
imperil the mission readiness, health, and safety of
servicemembers. Therefore, the committee encourages the
Department to continue investment in research for
chemoprophylaxis, surveillance, vaccine development, and other
countermeasures for malaria by the Walter Reed Army Institute
of Research and the Navy Medical Research Center.
Autonomously powered exoskeletons
The committee is aware of the Department of Defense's
ongoing efforts to explore the application of exoskeleton
technology. Catalyzed by initial Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency investments over the last two decades, proof of
concept of exoskeletons has been established and these
integrated systems have been used in field experiments and
simulated environments. The committee is also aware that
further maturation of this technology is being addressed in:
Army efforts to develop sufficient exoskeletons for
comprehensive operational evaluation; Navy evaluation of
industrial exoskeletons to manipulate heavy items and enhance
workplace safety and efficiency in a shipyard environment; U.S.
Special Operations Command test of a variant for helicopter
logistics support to refuel, rearm, and repair; and Marines
Corps evaluation of logistical operations such as loading and
unloading pallets of gear and ammunition in the field. The
committee understands this is a rapidly growing market that is
fueled by industrial production needs and healthcare
applications, and the committee encourages the Department to
continue to leverage the use of full-body, autonomously powered
exoskeletons and semi-autonomous or tele-operated single or
dual-armed, human controlled robots used for heavy lift
sustainment tasks.
Bomber long-term roadmap
The Air Force and Global Strike Command have consistently
stated that 225 bombers are necessary to ensure victory in a
near-peer conventional war. However, the current bomber roadmap
would leave the United States with only 175 bombers (100 B-21s
and 75 B-52s) until 2050. After that, with the retirement of
the B-52, and absent some effort to buy more bombers, the
bomber fleet would consist of 100 B-21 bombers. The committee
encourages the Department of Defense to consider multiple
options for maintaining a 225 bomber force after 2050, to
include procuring more B-21s or augmenting the B-21 fleet with
a lower cost B-52 replacement. Pursuing a lower cost B-52
replacement would be consistent with the Chief of Staff of the
Air Force's comments earlier this year about the F-35 program
and the need for the Air Force to invest in cheaper, more
flexible platforms.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to conduct a study on options for maintaining 225 bombers
after 2050 and to submit the results of the study to the
congressional defense committees with the budget request for
fiscal year 2023. The study shall include the following:
(1) An assessment of the benefits and risks of
adopting a bomber fleet consisting of 225 B-21s;
(2) An assessment of the cost differences between
acquiring 225 B-21s and replacing the B-52 with a low-
cost, non-stealthy bomber;
(3) An assessment of which missions, if any, for
which a lower-cost B-52 replacement might be more
appropriate than a B-21; and
(4) A recommendation of how the Air Force should
acquire 225 bombers, to include a balance between cost
and mission effectiveness.
Comptroller General assessment of operational security standards for
microelectronics products and services
The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense
(DOD) is developing trusted supply chain and operational
security standards for the purchase of microelectronic products
and services. These standards, which are to be in place not
later than January 1, 2023, are intended to protect the United
States from intellectual property theft and to ensure national
security and public safety in the application of new
generations of wireless network technology. Given the high risk
that microelectronics security threats pose to U.S. national
security and public safety, the committee directs the
Comptroller General of the United States to assess DOD's
implementation effort, to include the status of DOD's efforts
to:
(1) Develop trusted supply chain and operational
security standards for the purchase of microelectronic
products and services;
(2) Disseminate the standards throughout the
Department and train appropriate acquisition personnel
on the application of those standards;
(3) Update acquisition regulations to reflect the
standards; and
(4) Coordinate with commercial industry, allies, and
partners to ensure adoption of common standards to the
greatest extent practicable.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to provide an
initial briefing on the status of DOD's efforts to the
congressional defense committees, not later than August 1,
2022, and to provide periodic assessments of these efforts as
well any others that the Comptroller General determines to be
relevant during the course of the work.
Comptroller General review of the Department of Defense's directed
energy development efforts
The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense
(DOD) has spent decades researching, developing, and acquiring
directed energy (DE) technologies and capabilities. As the
range of potential applications for directed energy
capabilities has expanded, the DOD's ability to develop,
acquire, and field these capabilities in a timely manner is
critical.
Given DOD's investments in directed energy capabilities,
the diversity of these capabilities, and their application in
future conflict, the committee directs the Comptroller General
of the United States to continuously monitor and report on: (1)
DOD's DE efforts, including science and technology, research
and development, test and evaluation, and formal acquisition
programs; (2) The status of these efforts, including types of
technologies, technology maturation, and technology transition
strategies being used; (3) Efforts to build expertise and
infrastructure within the DOD and industry to support the
development, testing, and manufacturing of capabilities; and
(4) Other issues the Comptroller General deems relevant to this
review.
This review shall be provided in the form of a briefing to
the congressional defense committees not later than May 31,
2022, with follow-on reporting to occur on mutually agreed upon
dates.
Employing ground-based systems at sea
The committee directs the Department of Defense, not later
than April 1, 2022, to provide a briefing to the congressional
defense committees on any experiments with employing ground-
based systems on sea-based platforms. The briefing shall cover
the time period beginning January 1, 2018 and ending April 1,
2022. The briefing shall also include relevant details on any
experiments of this type planned after April 1, 2022.
Ground-based systems of interest include, but are not
limited to: the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, Multiple
Launch Rocket System, Autonomous Missile Launcher, Medium Range
Capability, Precision Strike Missile, Maritime Strike Tomahawk/
Tactical Tomahawk, counter-unmanned aircraft systems, and
Standard Missile-6.
Sea-based systems of interest include, but are not limited
to: L-class amphibious ships, Expeditionary Fast Transports,
Expeditionary Transfer Dock/Expeditionary Sea Base, Combat
Logistics Force ships, commercial fishing vessels, and barges.
Facial recognition and surveillance technologies
The committee is greatly concerned by the growing use of
surveillance and facial recognition technologies by some non-
democratic governments to surveil, track, and oftentimes
repress their citizens. The committee understands that some
foreign companies that have developed and are selling these
technologies to countries of concern may have also participated
in United States Government competitive prize programs. The
committee believes that the Department of Defense should not
enter into agreements with companies that have sold such
products to such governments.
Foreign military aviation training capacity
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, not later
than September 1, 2022, to provide a report to the
congressional defense committees on the Department of Defense's
foreign military aviation training capabilities and capacity
through 2030. The report shall be submitted in unclassified
form, but may include a classified annex. The report shall
assess the Department of Defense's ability to train adequate
numbers of pilots, aircrew, and maintenance personnel to meet
the backlog of U.S. military aviation requirements, while also
meeting the training demand for training to support Foreign
Military Sales and security assistance programs for allied and
partner nation aviation forces.
Graphitic composites and foam for Next Generation Combat Vehicle
The committee is pleased with the U.S. Army Ground Vehicle
Systems Center's (GVSC) decision to develop lower cost, wider
application of mesophase pitch-based graphitic composite and
graphitic carbon foam components in support of the Next
Generation Combat Vehicle (NGCV). The committee notes that
graphitic composites used in parts, batteries, and fuel cells
can reduce weight, increase strength, enhance mission
capability, and extend service life of the NGCV. Graphitic
carbon foam can dramatically reduce component heat signatures,
improve heat dissipation from electronic devices and sensors,
and cool electronic compartments in demanding environments.
Graphitic carbon foam can also protect against blast energy,
directed energy weapons, and electromagnetic pulse threats. The
committee recognizes the versatility and broad application that
graphitic composites and foam technology provides for the Armed
Forces by reducing the weight of parts by over 50 percent
against traditional metal components, while improving
survivability and performance. The committee recommends that
the GVSC continue to test, develop, and field low cost
mesophase pitch based graphite composite and graphitic carbon
foam components that can reduce weight, reduce energy
consumption, extend service life, reduce component thermal
signatures, dissipate heat, and improve equipment survivability
for the NGCV.
Graphitic composites and foam for special operations forces
communications and intelligence support systems
The committee understands U.S. Special Operations Command
(SOCOM) is working to develop lower cost, wider application
graphitic composite and graphitic foam components in support of
special operations forces communications and intelligence
support systems. The committee understands that graphitic
composite and foam components may reduce weight, increase
strength, enhance mission capability, and could extend service
life for these programs. Additionally, graphitic foam may
reduce component heat signatures, improve heat dissipation from
electronic devices and sensors, cool electronic compartments in
demanding environments, and could protect against blast energy,
directed energy weapons, and electromagnetic pulse threats. The
committee encourages SOCOM to continue its efforts to test,
develop, and field low-cost carbon fiber and graphitic carbon
foam in support of its programs, as appropriate.
High energy laser research
The committee notes that directed energy laser weapons
provide lethal effects to respond to rapidly emerging threats.
The committee also notes that research and development efforts
are needed to better understand system requirements and the
effects of laser pulse duration on weapons capabilities. The
committee urges the Secretary of Defense to continue to support
research in these technology areas in partnership with
industry, Federal laboratories, and academia.
High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles rollover mitigation
The committee is concerned with the continued rollovers of
High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWV), generally
known as Humvees, and other combat vehicles but has been
encouraged by the development of a rollover mitigation program
funded in last year's budget. The committee understands that
work began on this program and two recent proof of concept
pilots at Red River Army Depot have been successful and shown
that a retrofit approach works, thus removing any concern with
quality, readiness, and cost. As there are 54,810 HMMWVs in the
enduring and fielded fleet that are legacy vehicles, new, or
have been modernized without the kits installed, this is of
great concern to the committee. The President's budget request
for fiscal year 2021 only provided funding for 9,480 vehicles
in fiscal years 2021, 2022, and 2023.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to provide to the congressional defense committees, not later
than January 31, 2022, a plan as to how it will fund the
rollover mitigation retrofit for the remainder of the entire
HMMWV fleet.
Hypersonic research
The committee supports the continued development of
hypersonic technology and encourages the development of
hypersonic capabilities as a key element of the National
Defense Strategy. These weapons represent an area of intense
technological competition between the United States, People's
Republic of China, and Russian Federation. The committee is
concerned that there is a lack of focus on air-launched and
air-breathing hypersonic capability, including the potential
for rapid space launch capability facilitated by purpose-built
hypersonic aircraft. The committee believes that the Department
of Defense (DOD) needs to focus more attention on the
expeditious development and maturation of key hypersonic flight
technologies. In addition to the need to improve ground-based
test facilities such as wind tunnels, the DOD also needs to
increase its flight test rate to expedite the maturation and
fielding of hypersonic technologies. The combination of ground-
based testing and flight testing is critical to fully maturing
the fundamental technologies needed to field a hypersonic
flight system. High-rate hypersonic flight test programs would
help mature six critical technology areas: (1) Thermal
protection systems and high temperature flight structures; (2)
Seekers and sensors for hypersonic vehicles; (3) Advanced
navigation, guidance, and control; (4) Communications and data
links; (5) High speed aerodynamic characterization; and (6)
Advanced avionics and vehicle communication systems for
hypersonic vehicles.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering, in consultation with the
Secretaries of the services, to provide an executable strategy
and report to the congressional defense committees, not later
than December 30, 2021, on the plan to field air-launched and
air-breathing hypersonic weapons and the potential use for
tactically responsive launch capabilities within 3 years. The
strategy shall include required investment in testing and
infrastructure to address the need for both flight and ground
testing.
Hypersonics test facilities
The committee remains supportive of hypersonic technology
programs and a robust test infrastructure to support the
burgeoning operational capability in development today.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
deliver a report to the congressional defense committees not
later than March 1, 2022. The report shall: (1) Identify each
facility and resource of the Major Range and Test Facility Base
that is primarily concerned with the test and evaluation of
hypersonics technology; and (2) Recommend the optimal
organization and coordination mechanisms to promote effective
and efficient use of test resources to support hypersonics
technology development.
Joint All-Domain Testing and Training
The committee recognizes the critical need for the National
Guard, as an essential component of the Joint Force, to conduct
all-domain training and exercises in support of the National
Defense Strategy (NDS). The committee notes the Joint Staff's
development of the joint warfighting concept to support the
NDS. The committee notes that in order to support the NDS,
training capabilities can best be achieved within an all-domain
training environment. Such a venue should be able to support
training and exercises for aircraft; training in maritime and
littoral environments; amphibious training; joint fire support;
maneuver coordinated with fires and effects; multi-echelon
sustainment; combined arms live-fire; decisive major combat
operations scenarios; air mobility; cyber operations; space
operations; electronic warfare spectrum availability; mission
command; remotely piloted aircraft launch and recovery; and
four seasons capabilities.
The committee notes that the National All Domain
Warfighting Center (NADWC), which includes the Alpena Combat
Readiness Training Center, delivers a joint all-domain, four-
season training environment that is able to support its users
in their efforts to achieve or sustain proficiency in
conducting joint command and control, air, maritime, and ground
maneuver integration, and the synchronization of kinetic and
non-kinetic fires in a joint, multinational major combat
operations environment that is scalable across unit resources
levels. These capabilities are critical to the preparedness of
the U.S. Armed Forces for future warfighting demands.
Accessibility is critical to the ability of units and partners
to be able to train with their equipment in a wide range of
environments that mimic potential conflict zones. NADWC has
multi-modal capabilities to train and exercise joint logistics
and sustainment at operationally relevant distances. This also
provides a training environment that addresses training gaps
and builds readiness at multiple echelons with the scope and
scale required to address emerging challenges of near-peer
competitors.
The committee encourages the Secretary of the Army and the
Secretary of the Air Force to appropriately resource joint all-
domain training, exercises, test, and experimentation for the
Army and Air National Guards to maximize readiness in an all-
domain training environment to the maximum extent practicable.
Jointless hull development
The committee notes that as the Army seeks to revamp its
ground vehicle portfolio in order to compete with near peer
competitors, advanced breakthrough technologies are crucial
enabling efforts. The Army's jointless hull development work
within the Next Generation Combat Vehicle (NGCV) program is an
important enabling program for developing and building lighter
and better protected combat vehicles. The program's goal of
creating a large additive manufacturing printer capable of
producing hull sized components will not only benefit the NGCV
program but will also allow the Army to print hull sized parts
and components which can reduce part supply backlogs across the
Army. Therefore, the committee encourages the Army to continue
its research on jointless hull and additive manufacturing
technology.
KC-10 Divestiture
The committee remains concerned about the divestiture of
the KC-10 aerial refueling tanker while the replacement KC-46
Pegasus continues to display significant category 1
deficiencies involving the Remote Vision System and the air
refueling boom. Prior to any further divestment of the KC-10 in
fiscal years 2022, 2023, and 2024, the committee directs the
Commander, U.S. Transportation Command, and the Chief of Staff
of the Air Force to provide a briefing to the congressional
defense committees detailing tanking requirements and the
metrics made in determining the size and makeup of the tanking
fleet.
KC-46 basing
The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to
provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees, not
later than December 1, 2021, on the strategic basing process
and resulting decisions related to the KC-46 beddown. The
briefing shall cover the entirety of the basing timeline,
supporting evidence that informed decisions, and a thorough
explanation justifying any constraint to beddown KC-46 aircraft
exclusively within the continental United States (CONUS).
The briefing shall also encompass impacts to operational
and contingency plans in theaters outside of CONUS resulting
from a lack of overseas basing of the KC-46, how the U.S. Air
Force plans to mitigate those impacts, and what risks are being
imposed on combatant commanders due to the CONUS basing
constraint.
Mobile compact high energy laser
The committee recognizes that special operations forces
(SOF) conduct missions that require stand-off counter sensor
capabilities and understands that compact high energy laser
systems that can be moved, assembled, and operated by small,
dismounted teams could be beneficial to SOF operations. The
committee encourages U.S. Special Operations Command to pursue
the development of compact high energy laser capabilities, as
appropriate.
MQ-9 Resiliency
The committee understands the high demand for the MQ-9
Reaper in current operations. The committee would like to
understand what role the MQ-9 could play within a 21st century
battle landscape. Some obstacles to MQ-9 survivability within a
contested environment include a lack of command and control
(C2) resiliency and lack of threat awareness.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a report, not later than April 15, 2022, to
the congressional defense committees detailing: (1) The cost
difference, potential savings, and operational impact
associated with switching the MQ-9's C2 structure from SATCOM
to Low Earth Orbit satellites; (2) The feasibility of
autonomous MQ-9 operations without beyond line-of-sight or
within line-of-sight C2; (3) An updated assessment of the
Reaper Defensive Electronic Support System as a tool to remedy
the MQ-9's current lack of threat awareness; and (4) What
effect implementing these improvements would have on MQ-9
survivability.
Networked integrated controls kit and electronics link in support of
Next Generation Combat Vehicle advanced technology
The committee is encouraged by the U.S. Army Ground Vehicle
Systems Center's (GVSC) efforts to develop a prognostic and
predictive maintenance (PPMx) solution coupled with the ability
to track and disable associated vehicles remotely via a common
on-board electronic control unit should the requirement arise.
This technology potentially could gather data and transmit
securely from the vehicle to a cloud-based data management
center, enable the control, location monitoring, and usage of
each vehicle in support of PPMx, and provide increased
security. The committee encourages the GVSC to continue to
research, develop, test, and evaluate solutions that meet the
Army's requirements to support PPMx and provide additional
capabilities to the warfighter in deployed environments.
Policies to support use of additive manufacturing capabilities
The committee is supportive of the use of additive
manufacturing capabilities as a complement to traditional
manufacturing techniques for use in defense supply chains.
However, the committee is concerned about the Department of
Defense (DOD)'s ability to use these capabilities to
manufacture components of systems that are currently in
development and have yet to be fielded.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees,
not later than March 1, 2022, on issues relating to licensing
and use of technical data and intellectual property that may
limit the DOD's ability to use additive manufacturing
capabilities to produce systems components and parts as part of
robust and responsive supply chains.
Radar and multi-function sensor capabilities
The committee notes the significant commitment of the Army
Research Laboratory to collaborate with academia in the
development of new technologies in core mission areas. The
committee notes that one of these technologies is distributed
radar and multi-function sensors, which can provide:
performance improvement in coverage, targeting, and engagement
timeline; increased jamming power on target; new electronic
warfare effects; and enhanced survivability of participating
platforms.
The committee further notes that investments in distributed
radar and multi-function sensors, modeling and simulation of
distributed radio frequency (RF) sensors, advanced antennas and
RF electronics, and methods for timing and synchronization
across large numbers of platforms, will accelerate the
transformation of current sensor and effector architectures.
Therefore, the committee supports research into the
development of such technologies and directs the Secretary of
the Army to leverage research with academic partners to support
development of distributed radar and multi-function sensor
capabilities.
Report on special access program administration
The committee is aware of the disparate administration
organizations in the Department of Defense and an ongoing
discussion as to the most effective and efficient
organizational structure to meet the requirements for special
access program (SAP) administration. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the
Secretaries of the military departments, not later than January
31, 2022, to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees on the current organizations for SAP administration
across the services, as well as the rationale for the
differences. Additionally, the report shall recommend the most
effective organization and provide a strategy and timeline to
align all service SAP administrators with the optimum
organization. The committee also highly encourages the
termination of all service reorganization efforts until such
time as the committees receive the required report and strategy
from the Secretary of the Defense.
Study of injuries during aircraft ejections
The committee notes the evolving capabilities of high-
performance aircraft ejection seats and sees the need to ensure
the capability of an ejected pilot to escape and evade
potential capture or to engage in life-saving activities. The
committee is concerned that current ejection seats may cause
preventable injuries to pilots during ejection.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to conduct a study, to be completed not later than March 15,
2022, of all pilot ejections from Department of Defense
aircraft from 1985 to the present to examine injuries to
pilots, determine mitigations to injury, and inform design of
future ejection seat systems. The committee believes that the
study's findings should be considered during the development
and procurement of all future aircraft escape systems.
Support by manufacturing institutes for modernization priorities
The committee notes that the Department of Defense (DOD)
has established Manufacturing Innovation Institutes to support
enhancing partnerships between industry, academia, and
Government to develop advanced manufacturing capabilities in
emerging technology sectors.
The committee notes that the manufacturing institutes
should play a role in developing reliable, low-cost, and modern
production and industrial capabilities to support DOD's
modernization priorities. Therefore, the committee directs the
Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to
provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees not
later than October 1, 2022, on the support that the
manufacturing institutes are providing to the technical and
transition roadmaps developed for relevant modernization
priorities.
Support Naval Power and Energy Systems Technology Development Roadmap
The committee supports the recommendations in the recently
updated Naval Power and Energy Systems Technology Roadmap for
development of advanced power electronics, including silicon
carbide power modules, which can reduce the size and weight of
power conversion modules and other electronic systems needed to
power advanced sensors and weapons systems.
Wide-area motion imagery development
Wide-area motion imagery (WAMI) technology is a combat-
proven intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance system
that has provided persistent, real-time intelligence for
commanders in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility.
The committee is pleased that prior year congressional funding
has resulted in the development of a beyond-line-of-sight
capability, artificial intelligence/machine learning-ready
airborne processors/sensors, and multi-intelligence
capabilities. The committee encourages the continued
development into potential new uses for WAMI technology that
will support anti-access/area denial operations against near-
peer adversaries.
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Authorization of appropriations (sec. 301)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriations for operation and maintenance activities at
the levels identified in section 4301 of division D of this
Act.
Subtitle B--Energy and Environment
Expansion of purposes of Sentinel Landscapes Partnership program to
include resilience (sec. 311)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 317 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) to clarify that the
Sentinel Landscape Partnership program is also authorized to
address concerns of military installation resilience in
addition to conservation efforts.
Maintenance of current analytical tools in evaluating energy resilience
measures (sec. 312)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2911 of title 10, United States Code, to direct the
Department of Defense to develop a process to ensure that when
evaluating energy resilience measures, analytical tools are
accurate and effective in determining life cycle costs and
performance measures.
Military Aviation and Installation Assurance Clearinghouse matters
(sec. 313)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 183a(c) of title 10, United States Code, to clarify a
notice of presumed risk. The provision would also direct the
Department of Defense to develop a strategy to test and
integrate wind turbine interference mitigation technologies
into radars and the air surveillance command and control
architecture.
The committee is aware that compatibility concerns between
wind turbines and radars in the energy projects must be
balanced with proper radar siting. The committee also
understands there are mitigation options available today to
address wind turbine and radar issues. The committee strongly
urges the Department to accelerate efforts to develop, test,
and deploy mitigation options, including infill radar, which
can provide supplemental coverage to an existing radar. Infill
radar has been tested over a multi-year period by the Air Force
at Travis Air Force Base and demonstrated improved detection
capabilities while reducing impacts from turbines. The
committee understands the Air Force provided funding to the
Federal Aviation Administration to establish performance
requirements and develop a pathway to certify infill radars for
use in the national airspace system. The committee understands
there has not yet been testing of the integration of infill
radars with North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD)'s
surveillance command and control system known as Battle Command
System--Fixed (BCS-F). Given the promise of infill radars, the
committee strongly urges the Department to move forward with
field testing integration of infills with the NORAD BCS-F,
including fusing of radar data prior to delivery to NORAD to
solve a potential barrier with the architecture of the BCS-F.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee
not later than March 1, 2022, outlining: (1) The available
mitigation options by radar type, including infill radars; (2)
Potential mitigation options the Department is actively
investigating and the remaining steps and timeline to validate
and deploy such mitigation options if they are successfully
tested, including plans for testing integration of infill
radars with NORAD's system; (3) Mitigation options the
Department is not considering but could with additional
resources; and (4) Mitigation options the Department has
considered but rejected along with an explanation of why the
option(s) is not considered viable. For (2) and (3) above, the
briefing shall include an assessment of the resources necessary
to develop, test, validate, and deploy the individual
mitigation options, including opportunities for industry
financing under section 183a of title 10, United States Code.
The briefing shall acknowledge the role of other agencies in
the process, as appropriate.
Exemption from prohibition on use of open-air burn pits in contingency
operations outside the United States (sec. 314)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 317 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84) to prohibit the use of
open-air burn pits in contingency operations outside the United
States unless waived by the Secretary of Defense. If a waiver
occurs, the committee directs the Secretary to report to the
committee, not later than 30 days after granting an exemption,
the location of the open-air burn pit, the number of personnel
assigned to the location, the size and expected duration of
use, the need for the burn pit, and the specific rationale for
granting the exemption. Such a report may be classified.
Demonstration program on domestic production of rare earth elements
from coal byproducts (sec. 315)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a
temporary program to demonstrate the feasibility of separating
critical minerals and rare earth elements from coal byproducts
and acid mine drainage for the purpose of supplementing the
Department of Defense's domestic supply of critical minerals.
The committee understands that multiple higher learning
institutions have demonstrated this technology to date at a
small scale. The committee's intent is for such a technology to
produce at least 1.5 tons of rare earth elements per year and
an equal amount of cobalt. Ideally, the full rate capacity
would recover between 18 and 21 tons of rare earth elements per
year. Lastly, the committee directs the Department to consult
with the Department of Energy's National Energy Technology Lab
as much as possible to avoid any duplication and incorporate
any lessons learned to the maximum extent possible.
Authority to transfer amounts derived from energy cost savings (sec.
316)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2912 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify that
the Secretary of Defense may transfer amounts derived from
energy cost savings to other funding accounts of the Department
of Defense to be used for the purposes previously outlined in
statute.
The committee strongly supports the actions to reduce fuel
costs and use taken by the military departments' operational
and installation energy offices. Specifically, the committee
notes that the Navy has realized at least $20.4 million to date
in operational energy savings, while the Navy, Army, and Air
Force have saved $45.0 million, $36.0 million, and $34.0
million in installation energy savings, respectively. The
committee's expectation going forward is for the military
services to continue sharing best practices and improve cost
recovery mechanisms to further realize savings, improve
warfighter capabilities, and reduce fuel use.
The committee remains concerned that the Department has
failed to appropriately use the authority amended in fiscal
years 2020 and 2021 due to apparent internal disputes over
which colors of money can be used via section 2912 of title 10,
United States Code. Accordingly, the committee's intent for
this provision is to ensure that the Department exercise this
authority to realize cost savings across all accounts and for
the uses previously outlined in this section.
Sense of Senate on energy independence and diversification (sec. 317)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of the Senate that the United States should remain energy
independent to enhance national security.
Subtitle C--National Security Climate Resilience
National Security Climate Resilience (secs. 331-335)
The committee recommends a series of provisions (secs. 331-
335) that would direct the Secretary of Defense to fully
consider and make needed adjustments to account for current and
emerging climate and environmental challenges and to ensure the
climate resilience of assets and capabilities of the Department
of Defense. The provision would also direct the Secretary to
conduct a mission impact assessment on climate resilience in
order to identify the full spectrum of climate risks that
currently or could impact the Department. Additionally, the
provision would require the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff to submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the broader
strategic and operational impacts of extreme weather on the
Department.
Subtitle D--Treatment of Perfluoroalkyl Substances and Polyfluoroalkyl
Substances
Treatment by Department of Defense of perfluoroalkyl substances and
polyfluoroalkyl substances (sec. 351)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a task force to improve
testing for and treatment of per- and polyfluoroalkyl
substances by the Department of Defense; require preliminary
assessment and site inspection testing to be completed within 2
years to provide a preliminary basis for additional response
actions; and provide a status report on testing conducted at
all military installations and facilities of the National
Guard.
Public disclosure of testing and results of Department of Defense
testing for perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances and
additional requirements for testing (sec. 352)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to disclose testing and results of testing
for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances within 10 days of
receipt of validated testing results and to provide additional
requirements regarding testing for such substances.
Extension of transfer authority for funding of study and assessment on
health implications of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
contamination in drinking water by Agency for Toxic Substances
and Disease Registry (sec. 353)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 316 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91), as most recently amended
by section 337 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-
283), to extend the authorization and funding transfer by 2
years for the ongoing study and assessment on human health
impacts of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in drinking
water by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Report on remediation of perfluoroalkyl substances and polyfluoroalkyl
substances at certain military installations (sec. 354)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to the Congress a report
identifying the status of efforts to remediate per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances at 50 military installations and
National Guard locations by not later than 60 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
Report on schedule for completion of remediation of perfluoroalkyl
substances and polyfluoroalkyl substances (sec. 355)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a
report detailing a proposed schedule for the completion of
remediation of perfluoroalkyl substances and polyfluoroalkyl
substances by not later than 270 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Extension of temporary authority to extend contracts and leases under
the ARMS Initiative (sec. 371)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 343 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) and extend the lease
authority until November 25, 2025.
Incident reporting requirements for Department of Defense regarding
lost or stolen weapons (sec. 372)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense
committees a report on security, control, thefts, losses, and
recoveries of sensitive conventional arms, ammunition, and
explosives of the Department of Defense. Additionally, the
provision would require the Secretary of Defense to report a
confirmed theft, loss, or recovery of a sensitive conventional
arm, ammunition, or explosive within 72 hours to the National
Crime Information Center and local law enforcement.
The committee notes the provision would only require the
report to Congress requirement for the next three fiscal years.
Repeal of sunset for naval vessel examination report (sec. 373)
The committee recommends a provision that would strike
subsection (d)(3) of section 8674 of title 10, United States
Code, in order to retain an annual report relating to
examinations of naval vessels.
Report on ammunition organic industrial base modernization by
Department of the Army (sec. 374)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Army to submit to the congressional defense
committees a report, not later than March 15, 2022, on
ammunition organic industrial base modernization by the
Department of the Army. The provision would also require the
Secretary to, as part of the annual budget submission by the
President under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States
Code, for fiscal years 2023 through 2027, submit to the
congressional defense committees a report describing the
progress made in establishing and implementing the master plan
for each arsenal of the Department of the Army and an updated
strategy planned for each arsenal of the Department of the
Army.
Annual report by Secretary of the Navy on ship maintenance (sec. 375)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Navy to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees, not later than October 15 of each year,
setting forth:
(1) A description of all ship maintenance planned for
the fiscal year in which the report is submitted by
hull;
(2) The estimated cost of the maintenance;
(3) A summary of all ship maintenance conducted by
the Secretary during the previous fiscal year;
(4) Details of any ship maintenance that was deferred
during the previous fiscal year; and
(5) Details of planned ship maintenance that was
canceled during the previous fiscal year and a summary
of the reasons for the decision.
Budget Items
Unfunded requirements
In accordance with section 222a of title 10, United States
Code, the service chiefs and combatant commanders each
submitted a list of unfunded requirements. The committee
recommends an additional increase of about $6.2 billion for
Operation and Maintenance items on these unfunded requirements
lists.
Critical organic industrial base production capacity
The budget request included $54.6 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), of which $4.1 billion was for SAG 132
Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization.
The committee notes that the Chief of Staff of the Army's
unfunded priorities list included a request for additional
funds to assist in the critical Organic Industrial Base (OIB)
production capacity at McAlester Army Ammunition Plant,
Anniston Army Depot, and Red River Army Depot.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $7.4
million in OMA, for SAG 132 for the above projects to support
critical OIB production capacity.
Facilities Sustainment, Restoration and Modernization
The budget request included $4.1 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA) for SAG 132 Facilities, Sustainment,
Restoration and Modernization; $3.0 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Navy (OMN), for SAG BSM1 Sustainment, Restoration
and Modernization; $1.2 billion in Operation and Maintenance,
Marine Corps (OMMC), for SAG BSM1 for Sustainment, Restoration
and Modernization; and $3.9 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), for Facilities Sustainment,
Restoration and Modernization.
The committee understands that additional funds would
alleviate current challenges in maintaining facilities to
better support existing readiness levels, while increased
sustainment funding would also prevent disproportionate
restoration and modernization backlog growth.
Accordingly, the committee recommends the following
increases: $829.0 million in OMA for SAG 132, $575.0 million in
OMN for SAG BSM1, $224.0 million in OMMC for SAG BSM1, and
$774.0 million in OMAF for SAG 011R.
U.S. Africa Command intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
The budget request included $54.6 billion for Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), of which $384.8 million was requested
for SAG 141 U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM).
The committee notes that AFRICOM is currently able to meet
30 percent of its Joint Staff-validated intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) requirements in its area
of responsibility and has identified the need to sustain this
level of ISR support in fiscal year 2022 as an unfunded
requirement.
The committee recommends an increase of $67.0 million in
OMA for SAG 141 for ISR support to AFRICOM.
Training Improvements for Counter-small Unmanned Aerial Systems
The budget request included $54.6 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), of which $488.5 million was for SAG
431 Administration.
The committee supports the efforts of the Joint Counter-
Small Unmanned Aerial Systems Office (JCO), with the U.S. Army
as the executive agent, in advancing Counter-small Unmanned
Aerial Systems (C-sUAS) capabilities, technology, tactics, and
training. The committee understands the urgent need to expedite
training of a cadre of servicemembers in utilizing and
leveraging C-sUAS technologies.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million in OMA for SAG 431 Administration for expedited C-sUAS
training.
Army real estate inventory system
The budget request included $54.6 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA), of which $269.0 million was for SAG
437 Real Estate Management.
The committee notes that in the William M. (Mac) Thornberry
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public
Law 116-283), the conferees authorized the Secretary of the
Army to develop a pilot program to improve real estate
inventory and utilization. The committee also notes that the
pilot program will help to enhance current efforts by the U.S.
Army to inventory the space they now have available to find
potential savings and efficiencies consistent with the National
Defense Strategy. The committee further notes that additional
funding could be used to build additional capabilities into the
online tool like artificial intelligence and machine learning
capabilities to enhance information.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in OMA for SAG 437 Real Estate Management to further
the development of the Army's real estate prototype inventory
system.
United States Southern Command traditional intelligence, surveillance,
and reconnaissance
The budget request included $2.0 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army (OMA) for SAG 411 Security Programs, of which
$30.9 million is for U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM)
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR)
operations.
The committee notes that SOUTHCOM is currently able to meet
15 percent of its Joint Staff-validated ISR requirements in its
area of responsibility and has identified the need to sustain
this level of ISR support in fiscal year 2022 as an unfunded
requirement.
The committee recommends an increase of $18.0 million in
OMA for traditional SOUTHCOM ISR requirements.
Army National Guard Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams
Equipment Sustainment
The budget request included $7.6 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Army National Guard (OMANG), of which $704.8
million was requested for SAG 121 Force Readiness Operations
Support.
The committee notes the importance of training the Weapons
of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams at Dugway Proving
Ground and other similar facilities. Further, the Army National
Guard Civil Support Teams listed this training shortfall as an
unfunded requirement.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in OMANG for SAG 121 Force Readiness Operations
Support.
Identity, credentialing, and access management reduction--Navy
The budget request included $60.4 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Navy (OMN), of which $565.9 million was requested
for SAG 1CCY Cyberspace Activities.
The committee is concerned about the lack of integrated
efforts to establish a common enterprise identity,
credentialing, and access management (ICAM) solution across the
Department of Defense and encourages the Navy to work with the
Defense Information Agency in migrating its ICAM approach to an
enterprise solution.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease in OMN of
$5.0 million for SAG 1CCY.
Additional intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance for United
States Central Command
The budget request included $53.9 billion for Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), of which $2.4 billion was for
SAG 011C Combat Enhancement Forces.
U.S. Central Command identified $53.0 million in an
unfunded requirement for MQ-9s to support operations in the
command's area of responsibility.
The committee recommends an increase of $53.0 million in
OMAF for SAG 011C Combat Enhancement Forces in support of this
request.
A-10 force structure
The budget request included $5.6 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF) for SAG 011Y Flying Hour Program.
Elsewhere in this Act, there is a provision that would
prohibit the Air Force from retiring any of the A-10 aircraft
in the force structure, rather than retiring 42 aircraft as
proposed in the budget request.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $272.0
million in the OMAF SAG 011Y Flying Hour Program, of which the
committee notes $156.0 million is for contract work
maintainers.
C-130 force structure
The budget request included $5.6 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF) for SAG 011Y Flying Hour Program.
Elsewhere in this Act, there is a provision that would
require the Air Force to maintain 292 C-130 aircraft in the
force structure, rather than a force level of 279 aircraft as
proposed in the budget request.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $83.0
million in OMAF for SAG 011Y Flying Hour Program.
Office of Security Cooperation-Iraq reduction
The budget request included $372.4 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF) for SAG 015F US CENTCOM, of which
$30.0 million was for the Office of Security Cooperation-Iraq
(OSC-I).
The committee expects the OSC-I to further continue its
transition to a normalized security cooperation office,
including by transitioning funding for its operations to the
Foreign Military Financing Administrative Fund and the Foreign
Military Sales Trust Fund Administrative Surcharge Account.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $5.0
million in OMAF SAG 015F US CENTCOM for the OSC-I. The
committee notes that there is a corresponding legislative
provision elsewhere in this Act.
United States Space Command pathway to full operational capability
The budget request included $53.9 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), of which $272.6 million was
requested for SAG 015X Combatant Command Mission Operations--
U.S. Space Command (SPACECOM).
The committee notes the importance of accelerating the
stand up of SPACECOM operational capability and that the
Commander, SPACECOM submitted this as an unfunded requirement.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $26.8
million in OMAF for SAG 015X Combatant Command Mission
Operations--U.S. Space Command.
Joint Exercise Program
The budget request included $407.2 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 1PL1 Joint Chiefs of
Staff, of which no funds were requested for the Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff Joint Exercise Program.
The committee is concerned about sequential cuts to the
Joint Staff suite of joint exercise programs, including the
Joint Exercise Program, the Combatant Commander's Exercise,
Engagement, and Training Transformation Program, and others
across multiple accounts, even amid the increased salience of
such activities.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $50.0
million in OMDW for SAG 1PL1 to accelerate high-priority joint
training and experimentation activities in fiscal year 2022.
Modernized forward-look sonar
The budget request included $9.4 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for U.S. Special Operations
Command (SOCOM), of which $1.1 billion was requested for SAG
1PL7 Special Operations Command Maintenance.
The committee supports prioritization of resources to
address capability gaps, particularly those that ensure U.S.
Special Operations Forces maintain superiority relative to near
peer competitors, and notes that the SOCOM Commander has
identified modernized forward-look sonar as an unfunded
requirement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $900,000
in OMDW for SAG 1PL7 to support modernized forward-look sonar
capabilities for SOCOM.
Personal signature management acceleration
The budget request included $9.4 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for U.S. Special Operations
Command (SOCOM), of which $1.1 billion was for SAG 1PL7 Special
Operations Command Maintenance.
The committee supports prioritization of resources to
address capability gaps, particularly those that ensure U.S.
Special Operations Forces maintain superiority relative to
near-peer competitors, and notes that the SOCOM Commander has
identified the acceleration of personal signature management
capabilities as an unfunded requirement.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.4
million in OMDW SAG 1PL7 for acceleration of SOCOM personal
signature management capabilities.
Innovative Readiness Training increase
The budget request included $44.9 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $137.3 million was
for SAG 4GT3 Civil Military Programs.
The committee notes that $13.1 million of the request for
Civil Military Programs was for the Innovative Readiness
Training (IRT). The committee is aware that the military
services continue to face readiness challenges due to budgetary
constraints. The committee continues to recognize the value of
the IRT, which affords the military services realistic joint
training opportunities for National Guard, Reserve, and Active-
Duty servicemembers.
The committee understands that the IRT offers complex and
challenging training opportunities for domestic and
international crises. The committee is also aware that Alaska,
Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Indiana,
Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana,
Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina,
North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and
Wyoming all use the IRT.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in OMDW for SAG 4GT3 Civil Military Programs.
STARBASE
The budget request included $44.9 billion for Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $137.3 million was
for SAG 4GT3 Civil Military Programs.
The committee notes that the Science and Technology
Academies Reinforcing Basic Aviation and Space Exploration
(STARBASE) program is an effective program that improves the
knowledge and skills of students in kindergarten through 12th
grade in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0
million for SAG 4GT3 Civil Military Programs for the STARBASE
program.
Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency analytic tools for
assessing FOCI
The budget request included $44.9 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-Wide (OMDW), of which $941.5 million was
requested for SAG 4GTE, Defense Counterintelligence and
Security Agency (DCSA).
The committee understands that to fulfill its
responsibilities under section 847 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92), the
DCSA requires data analytic tools for assessing, continuously
monitoring, and mitigating risks associated with the foreign
ownership, control, and influence (FOCI) of current and
prospective contractors and subcontractors in the Defense and
Federal industrial base. DCSA provided a request for increased
analytic tools as an unfunded priority.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in OMDW for SAG 4GTE for analytic tools for DCSA.
Troops-to-Teachers Program
The budget request included $44.9 billion for Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $816.2 million was
for SAG 4GT8 Defense Human Resources Activity.
Since its inception, the Troops-to-Teachers program has
successfully placed many veterans in teaching positions
throughout the country, especially in high need school
districts. The committee notes that two years ago the
Department of Defense ended support for the program without
sufficient data to assess its effectiveness and its benefit to
separating servicemembers and veterans. Elsewhere in this Act,
the committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to restart the Troops-to-Teachers program
for a period of four years, with the requisite data collection
and reporting.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase in OMDW of
$15.0 million for SAG 4GT8 Defense Human Resources Activity.
milCloud 2.0 migration
The budget request included $44.9 billion for Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $1.9 billion was for
SAG 4GT9 Defense Information Systems Agency.
The committee notes that previously scheduled cloud
migration efforts at select fourth-estate agencies have been
repeatedly delayed by funding shortfalls, including shortfalls
created by reprioritization of funds toward immediate COVID-19
related teleworking information technology improvements. The
committee understands that the Agencies involved desire to
migrate to milCloud 2.0 as soon as possible, as required by the
Department of Defense Chief Information Office memorandum dated
May 2018.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $42.0
million in OMDW for SAG 4GT9 Defense Information Systems Agency
for milCloud 2.0 migration efforts.
Cybersecurity automation and orchestration for Joint Force
Headquarters, Department of Defense Information Network
The budget request included $44.9 billion in Operations and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $530.8 million was
requested for SAG 4GU9, for the Defense Information Systems
Agency.
Congress directed the Department of Defense to conduct
technology demonstrations of automated orchestration and
interoperability of cybersecurity systems and applications in
the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283). Section 1733 of
the same Act created a pilot program to use speed-based metrics
to measure performance and efficacy of the Department's
cybersecurity service providers and security operations
centers.
The committee recommends an increase in OMDW of $25.0
million for SAG 4GU9 to support these mandated cybersecurity
demonstrations and pilot activities.
Hardening of Department of Defense Information Network and security
validation demonstration
The budget request included $44.9 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $530.3 million was
requested in SAG 4GU9 Defense Information Systems Agency--
CYBER.
The unfunded requirements list submitted by the Commander,
U.S. Cyber Command, requested additional funding for hardening
Department of Defense networks. Elsewhere in this committee
report, the committee directs the Department to create a
security validation demonstration program. Accordingly, the
committee recommends an increase of $60.1 million in OMDW, for
SAG 4GU9, of which $20.0 million is for a security validation
demonstration program.
U.S. Africa Command international security cooperation programs
The budget request included $44.9 billion for Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-Wide (OMDW), of which $2.1 billion was
requested for SAG 4GTD Defense Security Cooperation Agency
(DSCA), and of which $1.1 billion is for the International
Security Cooperation Programs (ISCP) account.
The committee notes that U.S. Africa Command identified
maintaining its annual security cooperation program as an
unfunded requirement. The committee also notes that elsewhere
in this report the committee is recommending a Strategic
Competition Initiative for U.S. Africa Command and U.S.
Southern Command.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $60.0
million to OMDW, for SAG 4GTD DSCA for U.S. Africa Command
security cooperation programs and activities within the ISCP
account.
Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative
The budget request included $44.9 billion for Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $2.1 billion was
requested for SAG 4GTD Defense Security Cooperation Agency
(DSCA) and of which $250.0 million was requested for the
Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative.
The committee recommends an increase of $50.0 million to
OMDW for SAG 4GTD DSCA for the Ukraine Security Assistance
Initiative.
Joint Combined Exchange Training
The budget request included $3.2 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 1PLR Special
Operations Command Theater Forces, of which $48.0 million was
requested for the Joint Combined Exchange Training (JCET)
program.
The committee notes the growing importance of U.S.
interoperability with partners and allies in unconventional
warfare and foreign internal defense missions.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.2
million in OMDW for SAG 1PLR to restore the JCET program to
fiscal year 2021 enacted levels.
State Partnership Program
The budget request included $77.0 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Army National Guard (OMARNG), for SAG 431
Administration.
This SAG resources the State Partnership Program (SPP),
which supports the combatant commanders' security cooperation
goals and helps build the capabilities of partner security
forces.
The committee notes that the Fiscal Year 2022 Justification
for Security Cooperation Program and Activity Funding indicates
a reduction in funding for SPP from fiscal year 2021 to fiscal
year 2022 of $23.7 million.
To restore SPP to fiscal year 2021 funding levels, the
committee recommends an increase of $23.7 million in OMARNG for
SAG 431 for the SPP.
Impact Aid
The budget request included $44.9 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $3.1 billion was for
SAG 4GTJ, Department of Defense Education Activity. The amount
authorized to be appropriated for OMDW includes the following
changes from the budget request. The provisions underlying
these changes in funding levels are discussed in greater detail
in title V of this committee report.
[Changes in millions of dollars]
Impact aid for schools with military dependent +50.0
students.............................................
Impact aid for children with severe disabilities...... +20.0
-----------------
Total............................................. +70.0
Analytical tools in evaluating energy resilience measures
The budget request included $1.7 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for SAG 4GTN Office of the
Secretary of Defense, of which no funds were provided for
instituting a process to ensure that the Department of Defense,
when evaluating energy resilience measures, uses analytical
tools that are accurate and effective in projecting the costs
and performance of such measures.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in OMDW for SAG 4GTN for the maintenance of analytical
tools in evaluating energy resilience measures in the Office of
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations,
and Environment.
Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup
The budget request included $1.8 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for SAG 4GTN Office of the
Secretary of Defense, of which no funds were proposed for Bien
Hoa dioxin cleanup in Vietnam.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in
OMDW for SAG 4GTN for Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup. The committee
notes that elsewhere in this Act, the committee recommends a
provision that would extend the authority of the Secretary of
Defense to transfer up to $15.0 million to the Secretary of
State for Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup in Vietnam through fiscal
year 2022.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Nation-wide human health
assessment
The budget request included $44.9 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $1.8 billion was for
SAG 4GTN Office of the Secretary of Defense, of which no funds
were proposed for the ongoing Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) Nation-wide human health assessment related to
contaminated sources of drinking water from per- and poly-
fluoroalkyl substances.
The committee continues to support the ongoing human health
assessment. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase
of $15.0 million in OMDW for SAG 4GTN for the ongoing CDC
assessment.
Congressional Hearings and Reporting Requirements Tracking System
Modernization
The budget request included $44.9 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $1.8 billion was
requested for SAG 4GTN Office of the Secretary of Defense.
The committee notes that the Office of the Secretary of
Defense for Legislative Affairs (OASD(LA)) catalogues all
congressional reporting requirements in their Congressional
Hearings and Reporting Requirements Tracking System (CHARRTS).
Unfortunately, CHARRTS is an antiquated system with network
security issues, and the Department of Defense has recommended
that it be replaced with a modern cloud-based system. However,
the Department has not prioritized funding for this effort,
even though it could help streamline the congressional tracking
and reporting process, which is a high priority for both the
Congress and the Department.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in OMDW for SAG 4GTN to support modernization of
CHARRTS.
Cost Assessment Data Enterprise
The budget request included $1.8 billion in Operations and
Maintenance, Defense-Wide (OMDW), for SAG 4GTN Office of the
Secretary of Defense, of which $28.5 million was for Director,
Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation.
The committee commends the initiative of the Cost
Assessment Data Enterprise (CADE) to create a unified effort to
ensure the strategic collection, curation, and use of
acquisition, cost, and technical data for improved analysis and
decision making. In the past decade, CADE has advanced
capabilities for digitizing data collection, storage, and
sharing to expedite availability for analysis of acquisition
programs and contract spending; strategically planning and
collecting data; and reducing the reporting burden on
contractors while improving data quality and insight for
analysis. The committee is concerned that without adequate
funding, CADE cost data and software initiative will slow,
efficient availability of up-to-date data will decrease, and
the lack of strategic planning will cause irreparable data gaps
in the future.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.5
million in SAG 4GTN Office of the Secretary of Defense for
CADE's cost data and software efforts.
Defense Environmental International Cooperation program increase
The budget request included $1.8 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for SAG 4GTN Office of the
Secretary of Defense, of which no funds were provided for the
Defense Environmental International Cooperation (DEIC) program.
The committee continues to note that the Army National
Guard and other military units are frequently called upon to
respond to humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HA/DR)
crises around the world. The DEIC program enables the Army
National Guard to share best practices and lessons learned from
its own HA/DR missions with U.S. allies. This important program
promotes and develops allied HA/DR capability for a relatively
small amount of money. In addition, illegal trafficking can
threaten the stability and economies of nations of strategic
importance to the United States, particularly in Africa and the
Indo-Pacific, and often become a key source of funding for
extremist groups. The DEIC program can be used by geographic
combatant commanders to engage with U.S. allies, partners, and
other nations around the globe to assist them in addressing
these impacts that might undermine national and regional
stability.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million to SAG 4GTN for the purpose of reviving and broadening
the DEIC program.
Occupational license portability for military spouses through
interstate compacts
The budget request included $44.9 billion for Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $1.8 billion was for
SAG 4GTN Office of the Secretary of Defense.
The committee remains concerned about the lack of
portability of employment licenses and credentials across State
lines, which hinders military spouse employment. Due to the
delays and expense involved in re-licensure and re-
credentialing, many military spouses decide not to practice
their professions. This becomes a financial and career choice
issue for military families, impacting servicemembers' desire
to stay in the military.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million in OMDW, for SAG 4GTN for the activities outlined in
section 575 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92), which required the
Secretary of Defense to enter into cooperative agreements with
the Council of State Governments to assist with the funding and
development of interstate compacts on licensed occupations.
Office of the Secretary of Defense civilian workforce
The budget request included $44.9 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $1.8 billion was
requested for SAG 4GTN Office of the Secretary of Defense.
The committee is concerned about decreased funding for the
civilian workforce within the Office of the Secretary Defense.
The committee understands that this has resulted in a reduction
of civilian billets in critical components including the Office
of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, the Office of the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, and
the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0
million in OMDW for SAG 4GTN to support the civilian workforce.
Personnel in the Office of Assistant Secretary of Defense Sustainment
and Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health
The budget request included $44.9 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $1.8 billion was
requested for SAG 4GTN Office of the Secretary of Defense, of
which no funds were provided for sufficient numbers of
personnel in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Sustainment in Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health
(ESOH).
The committee recognizes the challenges facing the
Department of Defense in the Office's remit, ranging from per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances to the Military Housing
Privatization Initiative.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in OMDW for ESOH personnel in the Office of the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and
Environment.
Secretary of Defense Strategic Competition Initiative
The budget request included $44.9 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), of which $1.8 billion was
requested for SAG 4GTN Office of the Secretary of Defense.
The committee notes the establishment elsewhere in this Act
of the Secretary of Defense Strategic Competition Initiative,
which will support Department of Defense activities and
programs that advance United States national security
objectives in the strategic competition with near-peer rivals
China and Russia.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase in OMDW
of $20.0 million for SAG 4GTN for the Secretary of Defense
Strategic Competition Initiative.
United States Special Operations Command management and headquarters
The budget request included $9.4 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for U.S. Special Operations
Command (SOCOM).
The committee is concerned by the continued management,
headquarters, civilian personnel, and contractor growth within
the SOCOM enterprise and believes additional resources should
be better prioritized to address capability gaps, particularly
those that ensure our special operations forces maintain
superiority relative to near peer competitors.
Therefore, the committee recommends an undistributed
decrease of $28.7 million in OMDW for SOCOM. The committee
notes that these funds have been applied to unfunded
requirements identified by the SOCOM Commander elsewhere in
this Act.
Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid
The budget request included $110.0 million in SAG 4GTD,
Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid (OHDACA).
The committee notes that the OHDACA program has been the
primary source of funding for the Department of Defense
contributions to COVID-19 pandemic support to partners and
allies to include assistance to aid testing, diagnostic
support, infection control, personal protective equipment, and
contact tracing. Despite increased demands, the budget request
decreased from prior years.
The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million in
4GTD OHDACA for additional OHDACA programming.
Bulk fuel adjustment
The budget request included $6.6 billion across the
Operation and Maintenance accounts for the purchase of bulk
fuel.
Analysis conducted by the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) using the most recent data indicates that the Department
of Defense has overstated its refined fuel costs by $319.5
million in fiscal year 2022. The committee commends GAO for its
work in analyzing bulk fuel prices to assist Congress in
decision-making given the unique uncertainty of the current
fuel markets.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease in the
Operation and Maintenance accounts of $319.5 million to account
for likely overstated bulk fuel purchases.
Foreign currency fluctuations
The budget request included $290.5 billion in Operation and
Maintenance.
The committee notes that the Government Accountability
Office has repeatedly issued recommendations for the Department
of Defense to analyze its Foreign Currency Fluctuations,
Defense account balance given historical trends and managerial
usage of the account.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an undistributed
decrease of $300.0 million across the Operation and Maintenance
accounts.
Printing costs reduction
The budget request included $290.4 billion across the
Operation and Maintenance accounts.
The committee notes that the Government Accountability
Office found in its latest review of Department of Defense
document services that the Department averaged $608.0 million
per year in printing costs.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $25.5
million across the Operation and Maintenance accounts of the
active components and Defense-wide agencies for printing costs.
Unobligated balances
The budget request included $290.4 billion across the
Operation and Maintenance accounts.
The committee notes that the Government Accountability
Office has repeatedly issued recommendations for the Department
of Defense to analyze its unobligated balances given historical
trends and managerial usage of the account.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $1.6
billion across the Operation and Maintenance accounts of the
active and reserve components and a decrease of $577.2 million
in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide.
Items of Special Interest
Aberdeen Proving Ground
The committee understands that Aberdeen Proving Ground,
Edgewood Area, contained 63 remnant production plant slabs and
50-year-old laboratories that are inactive and mostly vacant.
These facilities were formerly used by Edgewood Chemical
Biological Center and the Medical Research Institute of
Chemical Defense (MRICD). The committee is encouraged by the
Department of Defense's inclusion of specific funding to remove
these contaminated facilities, which includes decommissioning,
decontamination, and demolition through a phased approach under
the Contaminated Building Demolition Program. The Department
has already obligated funds, begun demolition, and programmed
additional funds for future years to continue these efforts.
The committee encourages the Department to continue these
funding efforts to ensure demolition activities continue,
particularly with significant progress already underway.
Demolition of these facilities will result in cost savings on
infrastructure, maintenance, and security of these unusable
buildings and reduce the risk of contamination. The reduction
of these facilities will have a positive impact on the
surrounding missions, including the new MRICD facility, the
United States Army's Research, Development and Engineering
Command Advanced Chemistry Laboratory, and the Army Public
Health facility.
Advanced human performance based small arms training
The committee is aware of small arms synthetic training
capabilities within the Department of Defense (DOD) that have
received independent agency validation that demonstrate the
ability to increase readiness and lethality while improving
cognitive load management and emotional modulation to address
lawful and proportional application of force training and
implicit bias instruction, within the Department's small arms
training and readiness model. The committee commends the Marine
Corps Operational Test and Evaluation Activity-Quantico
(MOCTEA) for its diligence in testing and evaluating methods to
improve combat marksmanship and lethality by replicating the
physical, ocular, and cognitive challenges of combat utilizing
an Advanced Small Arms Lethality Trainer (ASALT). An
independent agency study demonstrated that the ASALT-trained
shooters outperformed all other training categories, with a
significant increase in individual marine's lethal efficiency
percentage, while also scoring higher on cognitive-based
decisions than their live-fire counterparts and reducing
resource requirements for combat marksmanship training,
delivering a far higher warfighter training return on
investment.
In light of these results, the committee strongly urges the
DOD to continue to prioritize and properly resource each
service's transition from less effective and efficient legacy
small arms simulation systems to advanced human performance
training platforms that integrate wearable biosensors and data
collection software capable of collecting and analyzing
individual servicemember data to track improvements,
degradation, and remediation requirements in weapon competency,
lethality, and the management of cognitive load and emotional
modulation throughout their military careers, pre- and post-
deployment, as validated by the MOCTEA study.
The committee also directs the Department to provide, not
later than March 1, 2022, a briefing that includes: (1) The
status of each service's integration of advanced human-
performance based small arms synthetic training systems; (2) A
description of the program or system's ability to utilize
Internet of Things-based biosensor and training data to track
and validate increased lethality, the impact and management of
cognitive load, and the ability to modulate emotions to address
implicit bias and cognitive-based decision making; (3) The
independent agency studies that validated the system's
capabilities and results; (4) A sampling of the individual and
unit readiness data outcomes; and (5) An assessment of how
small arms synthetic training systems that incorporate
biosensor and big data collection tools could assist in the
pre-and-post deployment health assessments and rehabilitation
of warfighters.
Advanced materials processing briefing
The committee remains concerned that the United States
relies heavily upon foreign imports for a number of processed
critical minerals, including rare earth elements. The committee
believes the Defense Logistics Agency should conduct a review
of the resiliency of the domestic defense industrial base and,
based upon the concern surrounding resiliency in the critical
minerals industrial base, brief the Senate Armed Services
Committee, not later than March 1, 2022, on whether it is
beneficial to establish advanced materials processing hubs that
can partner with industry and universities to facilitate
advanced materials processing and research and development in
order to increase resiliency across the defense industrial
base.
Agent Orange briefing
The committee notes that under Operation Red Hat, the
Department of Defense (DOD) imported Agent Orange to be used as
a herbicide on military bases in Okinawa. Agent Orange was
stored at the bases and used on public spaces in the 1980s
through 2013. There has been widespread medical evidence
linking Agent Orange and multiple health conditions.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee,
not later than March 1, 2022, on the use and storage of
herbicides on present and former military installations on the
island of Okinawa. The briefing shall discuss the shipment of
herbicides to Johnston Island under Operation Red Hat, the
excavation of suspected herbicide containers at Marine Corps
Air Station Futenma in 1981, the Okinawa City soccer pitch in
2013, and Kadena Air Base; and other suspected locations of
herbicide. The briefing shall address any test results by the
DOD and the Government of Japan showing the presence of the
chemical components of herbicide-2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxyacetic
acid, 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, and 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin. The Secretary shall consult with
appropriate organizations who represent veterans of Okinawa in
preparing this briefing.
Air Force range prioritization and modernization
The committee supports the Air Force's intention to
prioritize and accelerate investments to develop and upgrade
certain training ranges to attain threat matrix framework level
4 capability, such as peer threat, by not later than fiscal
year 2026. To that end, the committee supports Air Force
investment in advanced radar threat systems, live mission
operations capability common architecture, infrastructure,
advanced integrated air defense systems, air combat maneuvering
instrumentation modernization, global positioning jamming
suites, contested-degraded operations jamming suits, higher
fidelity targets with more advanced characteristics, modernized
weapons scoring systems, and secure-live-virtual-constructive
advanced air combat training systems. To continue this
investment effort, the committee made funding available
elsewhere in the bill.
Alternatively powered vehicles
The committee notes that the Department of Defense (DOD)
has indicated some concern as to what authority it might use to
obtain alternatively fueled vehicle (AFV) charging or refueling
stations on its installations. Not only may the Department use
authorities under sections 2805 and 2912 of title 10, United
States Code, to fund such facilities, as well as funding under
the Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment Program, but
the Department may also use section 2913(d) of title 10, United
States Code, authority to enter into agreements with utilities
to provide and operate such facilities. The committee's intent
is that the Department may authorize contracting officers to
use current non-DOD funding mechanisms, such as energy savings
performance contracts, utility energy services contracts
(UESC), and others, for transportation projects to modernize
installations, given it is unlikely that the Department will
have enough resources on its own to modernize through direct
appropriations. Similarly, the committee's intent is for the
Department to authorize contracting officers to use UESCs and
other non-DOD-funded mechanisms for the deployment of AFVs, as
defined in section 321 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public
Law 116-283), along with its related charging or refueling
infrastructure.
As the Department continues to use AFVs, the Department
should start its preparations now, ensuring the designs allow
for expansion as commercial and Government demand increases
over time. The committee also notes that Division Z, Title I,
section 1002, subsection (b) of the Consolidated Appropriations
Act, 2021 (Public Law 116-260) changed the definition of
``Energy Conservation Measures'' to include ``energy consuming
devices and required support structures,'' under which AFV
charging or refueling infrastructure would certainly apply. The
committee notes that the military services also are able to use
the current Government Services Administration blanket purchase
agreements to effectively pursue AFV charging or refueling
infrastructure whether through the procurement of, or
installation by, non-DOD funded agreement, in locations that
are covered by one of the area-wide contracts without
additional legislative authority. The committee also encourages
the Department to explore the concept of charging or refueling
as a service that would obviate the need for the Department to
procure, operate, and maintain AFV infrastructure.
Lastly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee not
later than March 1, 2022, including: (1) A determination of the
optimum inventory for non-tactical fleet vehicles with an
emphasis on eliminating unnecessary or non-essential vehicles,
as well as a determination by the Department of how much of the
non-tactical fleet should consist of AFVs or other vehicle
types; (2) The need for an executive agent for the development
of alternatively powered tactical vehicles; (3) The long-term
availability of internal combustion engines and spare parts for
such engines; (4) The relative tactical benefits and
limitations of each type of propulsion, such as speed,
acceleration, noise production, time to refuel or recharge, and
range and operational duration across the scope of mission
profiles; (5) The relative tactical benefits and limitations of
each type of propulsion with regard to providing support to
other tactical systems requiring electricity; (6) How
electrical and other alternatively powered propulsion systems
might be fueled on the battlefield and what investments might
be necessary to provide such a fueling system; (7) The relative
vulnerability to personnel and to interruption in the supply
chain of fuel sources for each type of propulsion system; (8) A
projected timeline of when a possible conversion to
alternatively powered tactical vehicles could reasonably occur
without causing a significant impact on readiness of the Armed
Forces; (9) The projected cost of converting or replacing and
sustaining alternatively powered tactical vehicles, to include
training; (10) Any national security implications related to
the use of and supply chain of AFVs and their source materials;
and (11) Any other element the Secretary deems appropriate.
The committee further requests that the Secretary identify
the types of tactical vehicles considered in the above analysis
and notes that the term ``alternatively powered,'' with respect
to a vehicle or a propulsion system for a vehicle, means a fuel
or power source described in the first sentence of section
241(2) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7581(2)) or propane.
Army organic industrial base modernization
The committee encourages the Army to consider the
operational and performance benefits of potentially adopting
commercial best practices in manufacturing throughout
installations comprising the Army's organic industrial base
(OIB) as part of their strategic framework for long-term OIB
modernization. The committee notes this could result in
significant improvements not only for legacy weapon system
sustainment but also next-generation weapon system sustainment.
The committee also notes that the Army has indicated a
modernized OIB must include emerging technology, such as
robotics and artificial intelligence, and visionary plant and
process layouts, and machine programming. The committee is
aware of emerging commercial manufacturing and repair
technology to include fixture-less assembly manufacturing,
automated fabrication, laser cutting, and a number of
techniques for cutting, forming, and shaping components that
could potentially help inform modernization efforts in the
Army's OIB to improve upon manufacturing efficiencies and
capabilities.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to brief the committee on courses of action to facilitate
engagement and coordination with the commercial industrial
base, to include non-traditional defense contractors regarding
OIB modernization, not later than March 1, 2022. The briefing
shall include: (1) An update on efforts to modernize aging
capital equipment; (2) An update on plans to include emerging
technology, to include fixture-less assembly manufacturing,
automated fabrication, robotics, and visionary plant and
process layouts and machine programming; and (3) The
advisability and feasibility of initiating pilot programs
between the industrial base and the Army's OIB related to
experimentation and demonstrations of commercial advanced
manufacturing techniques to help accelerate organic industrial
base modernization.
Army Pre-Positioned Stock readiness
The committee recognizes Army Pre-Positioned Stock (APS)
materiel is the cornerstone of the Army's ability to rapidly
project power. APS also includes war reserve stocks for allies,
which are stocks owned and funded by the United States, to be
released to supported allied forces under the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 (Public Law 87-195). As such, the
readiness and preparedness of APS sites are paramount in the
era of great power competition. The committee acknowledges
increases in ship use cost rates and the need to execute dry
dock maintenance at APS-3 (Afloat). The committee recognizes
failure to address required APS-3 (Afloat) fleet maintenance
adds unnecessary risk and uncertainty to U.S. and allied
nations' strategic logistics readiness and encourages the
Department of Defense to seek solutions to mitigate this risk.
Augmented reality training to support aviation operations
The committee is encouraged by the steps the Department of
Defense has taken to support necessary training and sustainment
activities that continue to enhance military operations,
especially in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Focus must
remain on providing the warfighter with the needed tools to
properly support their ongoing training for mission readiness.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to fully evaluate and consider deployment of commercial-off-
the-shelf virtual reality platforms that support aircraft
maintenance, operations training, and advanced pilot training
across all military services, specifically those dealing with
the MQ-9, C-130J, and F-16. The Secretary shall provide a
briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee on the results
of its evaluation not later than March 1, 2022.
Autonomous robotic targets for small arms training ranges
The committee is aware of increasing Marine Corps
operational force demand for small arms training range
autonomous robotic targets to improve soldier lethality, team
performance, and marksmanship. The committee understands that
this technology provides marines with an unpredictable and
dynamic training adversary, improves warfighter readiness, and
expands the useful-life of existing small arms ranges. The
committee also understands that within the Marine Corps,
operational units, as well as one training unit, have generated
two directive universal needs statements since 2008 for rapid,
widespread adoption of autonomous robotic targets, including
urgent requests from the Combat Marksmanship Program. These
requests resulted in six favorable studies and internal
assessments, including a year-long 2018 End User Evaluation
conducted by the Marine Corps Warfighter Lab that determined
autonomous robotic targets were a ``vast improvement to
training modality over existing systems and was value added in
all training events/scenarios.''
The committee also notes that this technology was
previously favorably reviewed by the Army Asymmetric Warfare
Group and Army Research Institute for small arms training and
has been utilized by select Army units for improved training
and soldier performance evaluation. Finally, the committee
understands that while this technology has shown promise to
deliver additional capability to the Marine Corps, the Marine
Corps Training and Education Command has thus far not initiated
a full capability development document as a precursor to a
program of record.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services
Committee by not later than March 1, 2022, on an assessment of
whether a program of record for autonomous robotic targets to
address the needs for both formal schools and operational
forces is needed. If the determination is that a program of
record is needed, the briefing should include a timeline for
implementation.
Additionally, the committee encourages the Army to
accelerate more rapid deployment of autonomous robotic targets
and to leverage end-user evaluations, existing logistics
support, and lessons learned from similar Marine Corps training
exercises in order to hasten potential adoption.
Briefing on reducing life cycle costs
The committee is encouraged by the efforts of the Office of
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment (ASD
Sustainment) to improve readiness and control life cycle costs.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the ASD Sustainment
to expand these efforts across the Department of Defense (DOD)
to support modeling complex defense systems, performing
simulation, and analytically optimizing readiness and life
cycle cost outcomes. This should reliably redefine readiness
not as a single measure but rather as a cost-optimized curve to
provide the Congress and the Department with multiple support
options across an array of budgetary scenarios. These scenarios
should help the Department better understand the current state
of readiness and the steps required to reduce life cycle costs
and improve system performance.
Additionally, the committee directs the ASD Sustainment to
provide a briefing, not later than January 15, 2022, to the
Senate Armed Services Committee on efforts to standardize
readiness modeling for major weapon systems across the
Department's enterprise.
Center for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
The committee notes that per- and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (PFAS) are persistent in the environment and may
adversely affect human health at certain levels. The committee
believes that a whole-of-government approach should be pursued
to address these substances and that a center is needed where
knowledge is compiled, correlated, and where best practices can
be shared. A multidisciplinary PFAS center would bring together
all levels of Government, universities, research institutions,
and private industry to support multidisciplinary and cross-
institutional projects and gather an index of existing
information in order to identify data gaps, guide approaches,
and inform policy decisions. The committee encourages the
Department of Defense to work with other Federal agencies to
consider this approach.
Cooperative agreements for shared use of airspace near United States
southern border
The committee urges the Secretary of Defense to consult
with the Secretary of State, and the heads of other Federal
departments and agencies as appropriate, regarding the
feasibility and desirability of initiating negotiations with
Mexico on shared use agreements for airspace near the United
States-Mexico border to meet the increasing demand for airspace
at U.S. military training ranges including the Barry M.
Goldwater Range.
The committee supports the Department's exploration of
appropriate shared use agreements with Mexico and directs the
Secretary of Defense to provide a report and briefing to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives not later than March 1, 2022, on the
feasibility and benefits of entering into a shared use
agreement with Mexico to extend range airspace.
Cost Assessment Data Enterprise
The committee believes that the complexity and scope of
cost estimation work at the Department of Defense continues to
expand, as departmental senior leadership and congressional
staff, among others, seek additional cost estimation
information on a growing list of programs of all sizes and
types. The Cost Assessment Data Enterprise within the Cost
Assessment and Program Evaluation office remains crucial to
ensuring that the accuracy and responsiveness of cost estimates
continues to improve at the Department of Defense. However, the
committee is concerned that funding for the Cost Assessment
Data Enterprise has fallen nearly 25 percent since the fiscal
year 2018 level of $8.0 million, even as the office's
requirements continue to grow and the necessity of lessening
data burdens on contractors increases in importance. Funding
decreases are evident in the Cost Assessment and Program
Evaluation office's own contribution to the Cost Assessment
Data Enterprise, as well as the contributions of other offices.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Deputy Secretary of
Defense to program for real growth in the Cost Assessment Data
Enterprise budget to accelerate modernization of cost
estimation and acquisition data across the Department of
Defense.
The committee directs the Deputy Secretary to provide a
briefing to the congressional defense committees, not later
than March 1, 2022, on the Cost Assessment Data Enterprise,
including a description of its use in execution of CAPE
missions, identification of resources made available to the
enterprise, and a discussion of the role of the Cost Assessment
Data Enterprise within the Department's overall strategy to
improve the use of data in decision making.
Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency industrial security
report
The committee notes the significant expansion of the
Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) mission
pursuant to section 847 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) and recognizes the
need for DCSA to have the proper resources to implement the
National Industrial Security Program (NISP) given its expanded
mission. In particular, the committee notes the national
security imperative that the DCSA successfully execute
comprehensive assessments of foreign ownership, control, or
influence for the NISP.
As such, the committee directs the Director of the Defense
Counterintelligence and Security Agency, not later than by
March 1, 2022, to submit to the congressional defense
committees and the congressional intelligence committees a
report on DCSA implementation of the NISP, to include a
description of the purpose, authorities, and resources
associated with the DCSA's administration of the NISP and other
industrial security programs. The report shall additionally
address the DCSA's path forward in overseeing the NISP,
including:
(1) The anticipated resources, workforce
authorizations, and authorities required by the DCSA to
perform its NISP and other industrial security programs
administered by the DCSA;
(2) Any anticipated and proposed additional
industrial security responsibilities to be carried out
by the DCSA on behalf of the Department of Defense,
including--
(a) the DCSA's role in the implementation of
the assessment and mitigation of risks related
to Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence of
contractors and subcontractors doing business
on behalf of the Department of Defense, to
include those conducting work on behalf of the
Agency, per section 847 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020; and
(b) the Controlled Unclassified Information
program, established by Executive Order 13556,
on behalf of the Department of Defense; and
(3) the resources, workforce authorizations, and
authorities required to perform any anticipated and
proposed responsibilities on behalf of the Department
of Defense.
Demining the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's firing ranges in
Afghanistan
The committee acknowledges the humanitarian threat
presented by North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) firing
ranges in Afghanistan and encourages the Department of Defense,
in coordination with the Department of State, NATO, and other
members of the international coalition, to assess the
advisability and feasibility of clearing these areas of
explosive contamination, particularly in light of the planned
departure of international security contractors. The committee
further notes the important role that humanitarian demining
organizations play in both undertaking demining work and
supporting security and stability for Afghan nationals. The
committee encourages the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to
partner with humanitarian demining organizations where
practicable to complete such work.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State, and the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, to provide a briefing to the
Senate Armed Services Committee regarding the assessment,
including the feasibility of partnering with humanitarian
demining organizations, not later than September 1, 2022.
Distributed energy projects briefing
The committee is aware of Department of Defense (DOD)
initiatives on energy resilience as outlined in DOD Instruction
4170.11, Installation Energy Management, and commends the
Department for its efforts to date to mitigate the impact of
energy disruptions on military installations that could
threaten mission accomplishment. The committee continues to
encourage the Department to procure, operate, maintain, test,
and upgrade energy resilient systems for critical energy
requirements on its military installations. The use of
alternative or distributed energy offers significant promise in
achieving energy resilience and meeting the renewable energy
goal of 25 percent by 2025 for the Department. However, the
committee is interested in exploring how the Department can
better address barriers to development of additional
distributed energy projects to support military installation
energy needs. The committee encourages the Department, in
coordination with the military services, to standardize,
wherever possible, the policies and processes that guide
distributed energy projects.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments, to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services
Committee, not later than March 1, 2022, on the following: (1)
The average time elapsed from project initiation to completion
for non-DOD funded distributed energy projects; (2) Areas that
the DOD and the military services can standardize items such as
consent agreements, power purchase agreements, site licenses,
ground and roof-top leases and subleases, and memos of
aforementioned documents; (3) An analysis of whether any
actions, including more flexible contract terms, could increase
incentives for project developers; (4) Measures that would
increase incentives for battery storage on military
installations; (5) An analysis and comparison of the cost-
effectiveness of the various projects and technologies; and (6)
An analysis determining whether net-metering arrangements
between developers and installations that provide electricity
under utility service agreements are subject to Federal
Acquisition Rules.
Encouraging the Army's integration of synthetic and live training
The committee agrees with senior Army leaders' stated
desire to accelerate live training efforts within the Synthetic
Training Environment (STE) program such that this critical
element reaches initial operating capability before fiscal year
2026, as originally planned. The committee believes the Army
must continue STE-Live Training System (LTS) and STE Soldier
Virtual Trainer (SVT) development and is supportive of
leveraging additional STE program funding in this effort.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services
Committee, not later than December 15, 2021, on efforts to
accelerate the live training element of STE. The briefing shall
include, but not be limited to, a detailed description of STE-
LTS and SVT development to date, an assessment of benefits
accrued from incorporating live training within STE, and any
plans for accelerating synthetic live training environment into
a program of record.
Energy savings performance contracts
The committee is aware of significant delays occurring
within U.S. Army Installation Management Command's (IMCOM's)
utilization of energy savings performance contracts (ESPCs) and
utility energy service contracts (UESCs). For example, the
committee notes that investment grade audits (IGAs) for pending
projects are being delayed significantly at IMCOM without
substantive reason being provided. As a result, installation
resilience needs are going unaddressed while private sector
partners are waiting months for proposal feedback. While the
committee recognizes that due diligence must be completed to
ensure performance contracts are a positive investment for the
Government and taxpayers, a decision on whether to proceed with
a contract must be made expeditiously at each phase of the
process.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a briefing to the committee, not later than
March 1, 2022, on the average processing times of ESPCs and
UESCs, any actions the Department of Defense has taken to
reduce these timelines, the standard timeline for providing
feedback to the contractor on submitted IGAs, how often this
timeline has been exceeded in the past 3 years and who
currently has the authority to terminate the project after
review of the IGA, what the timeline is for providing the
decision to terminate the project to the installation commander
and the contracting officer, and how often has this timeline
been exceeded in the past 3 years.
Equipment procurement parity for operational reserves
The committee notes the continued importance of reserve
component units to fulfill critical operational and manning
requirements in support of combatant commands. As the military
services continue to develop, procure, and issue new non-
aircraft equipment necessary to compete with near-peer
adversaries in support of the National Defense Strategy, it is
imperative that new non-aircraft equipment is distributed
between the active, National Guard, and Reserves based on the
operational need of the combatant commander. The committee is
concerned that aging older-model platforms in the Guard and
Reserves present operational and readiness risks to units that
are consistently deployed. Reliance by Guard and Reserves units
on older non-aircraft equipment that is less capable,
maintenance-intensive, and hamstrung by increasingly scarce
repair parts hampers unit readiness and reduces the capability
units provide to combatant commanders when deployed. The
committee encourages the military services to work with the
combatant commands to consider the age of non-aircraft
equipment in Guard and Reserves units as they prioritize and
field new equipment sets to the force.
Expansion of the ship depot maintenance pilot program
The committee notes that the budget request for fiscal year
2022 includes a continuation and expansion of the ongoing ship
depot maintenance pilot program. This program utilizes funds
from the Other Procurement, Navy (OPN) account to improve
maintenance outcomes through an extended funding obligation
period for private contracted ship maintenance in the U.S.
Pacific Fleet.
The committee further notes this pilot program has been in
effect since fiscal year 2020, with $1.0 billion in OPN funds
in fiscal year 2020, $1.2 billion in OPN funds in fiscal year
2021, and $1.3 billion in OPN funds requested in fiscal year
2022.
The committee believes this pilot program has demonstrated
the value of using the OPN account to improve ship depot
maintenance outcomes through improved industrial base stability
in ship repair scheduling, improved ability to horizontally
group availabilities, improved ability to extend contract
awards across fiscal years, reduced potential for poor quality
obligations late in a fiscal year, and an opportunity to
establish and capitalize on best practices and improve ship
maintenance agility.
The committee recommends that the Congress support
continuation of this pilot program during fiscal year 2022,
including expanding the pilot program to include the U.S. Fleet
Forces Command.
Ground Test Asset Board
The committee understands that the Ground Test Asset Board
(GTAB) is a new Air Force Test Center (AFTC) presentation that
is intended to replicate the Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC)
``Fleet Board'' briefing to quickly bring awareness to the
capacity and demographics of specific AFTC test/test support
facilities. AFTC is currently developing the GTAB to provide
information to stakeholders as to the capacity and limitations
for selected test facilities. The committee understands that
the GTAB brings together capacity, demand, capability
description, and demographics such as age, Plant Replacement
Value (PRV), current assessment, and future needs. The
committee notes this is different from the traditional
Facilities, Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization (FSRM)
model and could provide a more comprehensive picture of the
total sustainment needs of certain facilities.
As the AFTC works to achieve 2 percent PRV, the committee
recognizes the importance of the quantitative and qualitative
information provided by the GTAB in order to ensure the
capabilities, constraints, and needs of test/test support
facilities across its enterprise. The committee understands
that this new concept may better depict preventive maintenance
funding levels for installations such as the AFTC. The
committee notes that while PRV gives a rough estimate for
replacement of subject facility, it may not be a complete view
of requirements for research, development, test, and evaluation
facilities. The committee understands that the AFTC is instead
developing Equipment Replacement Value (ERV), which are systems
not covered by PRV, the ``missionized'' portion of the
facility. When combining PRV and ERC, a valuation of Capability
Replacement Value (CRV) may better provide estimates to replace
a research, development, test, and evaluation ``capability''
vice the empty facility.
The committee believes there are disconnects in financial
resourcing for Air/Ground Test Infrastructure, and CRV
development through the GTAB could help determine the adequacy
of FSRM funding. Additionally, as reflected in 2018 and 2021
Secretary of the Air Force AFTC assessments, the AFTC is not
property resourced to comply with the 2018 National Defense
Strategy/Chief of Staff of the Air Force direction to
``Accelerate change, or lose.''
The committee believes that the GTAB could increase
external awareness of crucial ground test assets by adopting
the ``Fleet Board'' presentation measuring capacity and
capability.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services
Committee not later than January 1, 2022, on the GTAB's ability
to better inform FSRM resourcing decisions. The briefing shall
include, but not be limited to:
(1) The current status of standing up the GTAB;
(2) Planned milestones to measure success;
(3) Any known gaps in funding resources for AFTC
test/test support facilities, as well as for non-AFTC
test/test support facilities;
(4) An explanation of how the development of FSRM
funding requirements through use of the CRV informs Air
Force FSRM funding allocation decisions; and
(5) Information on how the GTAB could inform
Sustainment Management System Builder, to which all
services, including the Air Force, will be
transitioning.
High pressure advanced rapid deposition technology
The committee recognizes that repairs using high pressure
advanced rapid deposition (HPARD) technology for maintenance,
repair, and overhaul is a proven technology for repairs
performed by depots and deployed forces as evidenced by the
services' use of this technology for repairs to submarines,
other vessels, aircraft, and ground vehicles. These repairs
have resulted in significant cost savings as compared to
procuring new parts or sourcing obsolescent parts.
Accordingly, the committee encourages procurement of HPARD
technology systems for maintenance and repairs of the types of
systems cited above and further exploration by the Department
of Defense of applications for this cost saving technology in
order to enable greater service life extension as well as
leverage operations and maintenance cost savings for investment
in research, development, test, and evaluation, and
procurement. Additionally, the committee encourages the
Department to institutionalize annual funding for further
development and procurement of HPARD technology in order to
assure stabilized and predictable funding levels.
Knee and elbow protection
The committee commends the U.S. Marine Corps Systems
Command (MARCORSYSCOM) for being proactive to improve knee and
elbow protection for marines. As musculoskeletal injuries
remain a top disability claim for servicemembers transitioning
to Veterans Administration healthcare, the Marine Corps has
made the modernization of knee and elbow protection a priority.
The committee understands that through the Marine Corps
Equipping Challenge, MARCORSYSCOM has identified commercially
available and field validated solutions that provide
significantly improved comfort, impact protection, and operator
acceptance while maintaining mobility and range of motion.
Accordingly, the committee encourages MARCORSYSCOM
leadership to advance these improvements through timely
acquisition to ensure that all Marine Corps personnel in combat
and training environments are provided with the most effective
knee and elbow protection available to improve combat
capability and the long-term health of marines.
Large-capacity batteries
The committee notes that the Department of Defense has a
strategic vulnerability due to its heavy reliance on certain
foreign mineral imports necessary for large-capacity batteries
such as lithium, cobalt, graphite, manganese, and nickel. As a
result of this supply and production issue, and consistent with
the identification of the criticality of ``large-capacity
batteries''' in Executive Order 14017 of February 24, 2021, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to assess whether
lithium-ion battery materials, such as lithium, cobalt,
manganese, graphite, and nickel, and the domestic supply chains
that mine, refine, recover, recycle, and process them should be
eligible to receive a Presidential Determination as Defense
Production Act Title III materials, given that these materials
are required for a growing list of weapons platforms to include
unmanned aerial aircraft, special operations forces missions,
and other applications across the Department. The Secretary
shall provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee
regarding the results of this assessment not later than March
31, 2022.
Military installation resilience training
The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense
(DOD) is setting ambitious goals for military installation
resilience and energy innovation to strengthen combat
capabilities and make installations more resilient. To ensure
that the DOD meets these goals in a timely and effective
manner, the committee directs the Department to add military
installation resilience curricula to DOD education and training
programs for officers assigned to be installation commanders to
build competency on the risks, challenges, and opportunities
that a variable climate brings to the national security
enterprise. The DOD has world-class education and training
programs, but curriculum priorities largely do not touch on
approaches to resiliency. The committee notes that building
military installation resilience knowledge would be especially
useful in forums like pre-command courses where those assuming
command of, for example, a large military installation, may
face extreme weather impacts and environmental
responsibilities. The Joint Staff J-7 has a key role to play as
part of its Joint Professional Military Education governance
and accreditation responsibilities.
The committee notes that DOD offers several foreign
military training program opportunities. For example, the
International Military and Training (IMET) program was
established to enhance regional stability through mutually
beneficial military-to-military relations and enhanced
interoperability between DOD and its allies. IMET and similar
programs provide a tremendous opportunity to enhance
interoperability for responding to natural disasters, as well
as to build a common base of knowledge on military installation
resilience, environmental security risks, and best practice
solutions and to share experiences and lessons learned. DOD
should also consider using existing fiscal authorities to
conduct and pay for joint security training exercises on these
issues with partner militaries and security forces to achieve
interoperability that advances American interests in strategic
areas of the world that are particularly vulnerable to extreme
weather events that might generate DOD military involvement.
Training might address mass migration and instability triggered
by water and food shortages, traditional humanitarian relief
exercises simulating natural disasters, as well as more
technical exercises around construction of natural and built
infrastructure to increase resilience. Because of the detailed
nature of this matter, it is the committee's view that it is
best left to the DOD to develop the training and that statutory
direction is not needed at this time. However, the committee is
also concerned that the DOD is currently unable to access
innovative energy and military installation resilience
technologies or deploy technologies and new business models at
the scale, speed, and cost-effectiveness required to meet these
challenges.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Department to
create and/or partner with a consortium of industry, academic,
and national laboratory partners dedicated to military
installation resilience and energy innovation pursuant to
sections 2371, 2371b, and 2373 of title 10, United States Code.
Lastly, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment shall provide a briefing to the Senate Armed
Services Committee on its progress in developing a consortium
dedicated to military installation resilience and energy
innovation, as well as the other DOD education and training
programs mentioned above, not later than March 1, 2022.
Military munitions program construction support
The committee recognizes that construction support
activities are an effective and cost-efficient way to reduce
risks associated with the potential presence of unexploded
ordnance (UXO) in instances where property owners are
conducting ground-disturbing activities. However, the committee
is aware that construction support has been inconsistently
deployed and strongly urges the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to
develop consistent guidance on how construction support can be
used to assist landowners in order to regain more productive
use of properties known or suspected to contain UXO munitions.
The committee is also concerned that extreme weather
events, including heavy rain and flooding, have caused UXO to
rise to the surface in Formerly Used Defense Sites where
surface-level cleanup has occurred, including at the Waikoloa
Maneuver Area. The committee strongly urges the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers to institute a process whereby a subsurface
cleanup could be undertaken concurrently, as a Time Critical
Removal Action, should it be required in the interest of public
safety, particularly at sites where future development or
activities are planned.
Optimizing private sector fast attack submarine maintenance
The committee notes the budget request for fiscal year 2022
includes a continuation and expansion of fast attack submarine
depot maintenance availabilities contracted with private
shipyards that had previously been performed at Navy public
shipyards.
The committee believes fast attack submarine depot
maintenance contracted with private shipyards has the potential
to reduce overloading issues at public shipyards, provide
workforce and workload stability at private shipyards, and
increase the operational availability of fast attack submarines
for fleet commanders. However, the committee is concerned that
recent fast attack submarine depot maintenance availabilities
contracted with private shipyards have significantly exceeded
initial cost and schedule estimates.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees, not
later than February 1, 2022, on options to improve outcomes in
contracting with private shipyards for fast attack submarine
depot maintenance availabilities. This report shall identify
courses of action that evaluate different scopes of work,
periods of performance, and intervals between availabilities at
each private shipyard currently capable of performing such
work. One such course of action shall be to evaluate the
repeated contracting with private shipyards for the first
drydock availability for Virginia-class submarines, with one
such submarine in planning and one such submarine in
maintenance at any given time. Based on the courses of action
evaluated, the Secretary shall identify the optimal approach
for contracting with private shipyards for fast attack
submarine depot maintenance availabilities in terms of cost,
schedule, and performance.
Pilot program to extract natural gas to develop energy security and
resilience
The committee directed the Department of Defense, in the
Senate Report accompanying S. 1376 (S. Rept. 114-49) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016, to
provide an analysis of major Department of Defense
installations with likely gas and oil reserves, the expected
quality of those reserves, the estimated cost and savings of
producing gas and oil at such installations, the statutory and
regulatory challenges to implementing such energy development
projects, potential mission and environmental impacts from such
energy development projects, and recommendations for which
installations, if any, may benefit from such development.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to review and update this analysis and provide a briefing to
the Senate Armed Services Committee, not later than March 1,
2022, with the updated analysis. The briefing shall include a
recommendation for a pilot site to initiate a pilot program to
use on-site mineral reserves to enhance the installation's
energy resilience and security, with the objective of providing
the installation with on-site energy production, light
refining, storage, and onsite generation to maintain critical
operations during intentional or unintentional grid outages.
Propulsion readiness
The committee recognizes the criticality of aircraft engine
readiness across the Department of Defense (DOD) and notes the
impacts of system age, supply chain viability, industrial base
dynamics, and workload on the DOD's ability to modernize and
sustain propulsion systems across the life cycle. The committee
is encouraged by the DOD's actions to maintain the readiness of
the overall propulsion fleet. However, the committee is
concerned about funding levels to ensure long-term engine
readiness and continued propulsion dominance over near-peer
competitors.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Readiness to provide a briefing to the Senate
Armed Services Committee, not later than February 1, 2022, on
systemic factors impacting propulsion readiness and
effectiveness. The briefing shall include, but not be limited
to, a discussion on: (1) Engine system age; (2) Leveraging
capability from the commercial industrial base; (3) Industrial
base viability and the process to balance workload between the
public and private sectors; (4) Funding sufficiency to address
research, modernization, and sustainment requirements; and (5)
Impediments to speed in development and sustainment.
Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative
The budget request included $1.8 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide, for SAG 4GTN Office of the Secretary
of Defense, of which $150.0 million was for the Readiness and
Environmental Protection Initiative (REPI). The committee has
long recognized that the REPI program has proven to be highly
effective in addressing encroachment and in maintaining and
improving military installation resilience. The committee
appreciates the success that the REPI program has achieved in
addressing encroachment and resiliency problems and encourages
the Department to continue its support of the program in future
budget requests.
Recycling rare earth materials
The committee is encouraged by the Department of Defense's
actions in the previous year to establish and maintain a
secure, domestic supply of neodymium iron boron rare earth
permanent magnets. The committee encourages the Department to
continue using the Defense Production Act to create needed
industrial capabilities when gaps in critical supply chains are
identified. The committee is aware that the Department has
significant quantities of end-of-life equipment, such as hard
drives, that contain appreciable amounts of rare earth
materials. These materials can be recovered and recycled into
useful products, including permanent magnets, thereby reducing
the need to import rare earth materials from China.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to brief the committee,
not later than March 1, 2022, on the ability of the Department
to identify rare earth-containing end-of-life items, to sell or
barter such end-of-life items to rare earth recycling
manufacturers, and to ensure that recovered rare earth and
other critical materials are retained in the United States.
Report on competitiveness in the defense industrial base
The committee supports a more competitive defense
industrial base and efforts to ensure the Department of Defense
is making decisions with full awareness of the competitive
implications of corporate mergers and acquisitions. The
committee notes the recent July 2021 Executive Order 14036 on
Promoting Competition in the American Economy has implications
for mergers and acquisitions within the defense industrial
base.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to submit to the
congressional defense committees a report, not later than March
1, 2022, that includes: (1) Actions being taken within the
Department of Defense to comply with the Executive Order,
including those related to mergers and acquisitions, and (2) A
detailed assessment of the state of competition within the
defense industrial base, including areas where a lack of
competition may be a concern, and any recommendations for
changes in defense acquisition processes to improve outcomes.
Review to reduce reporting requirements
The committee continues to be interested in reducing the
number of Department of Defense reports required to be sent to
the Congress. Accordingly, the committee directs the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to
evaluate its existing statutory and congressional reporting
requirements in its areas of responsibility in order to
identify any overlap, duplication, and opportunities for
streamlined reporting. The Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment shall provide a briefing on the
findings of the evaluation to the Senate Armed Services
Committee not later than February 1, 2022. The briefing shall
include recommendations to reduce, combine, or streamline
specific reports while retaining reports that are essential to
enabling long-term tracking and informing policymaking.
Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Plan implementation
The committee recognizes the critical strategic and
logistics role our public shipyards play in the security of our
Nation. To address chronically unmet infrastructure needs at
the shipyards, the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) directed the Department of
Defense to create and implement a Shipyard Infrastructure
Optimization Plan (SIOP). The committee strongly supports the
SIOP, which will revitalize the Nation's four public shipyards
and equip them with the facilities needed to meet the
requirements of the naval fleet into the future. The public
shipyards are American institutions of shipbuilding and
maintenance that, in some cases, date back more than two
hundred years. They employ a highly skilled workforce that
performs critical repair and maintenance work on complex Navy
ships and submarines in order to maintain the fleet's
operational readiness needed to respond to national security
requirements. The committee believes continued investment in
the public shipyards is a national security imperative, and the
SIOP must remain on schedule.
The committee is very concerned that the Navy's SIOP is
falling behind schedule because details on multiple projects
that are needed to properly assess and evaluate this critical
recapitalization effort have not been timely and fully provided
to the committee. While unforeseen challenges arise during the
execution of large and complicated construction projects, they
can often be mitigated with prudent planning and foresight.
This heightens concerns whether the Navy can maintain its
current operational depot-level maintenance schedule as dry
docks are temporarily unavailable when they are upgraded and
replaced, whether adequate resourcing has been provided to the
managing program office to mitigate the risk of construction
cost increases, and how the Navy will meet its commitment to
its budget for these projects. The committee urges the Navy to
incorporate these concerns into the detailed planning process
for planned implementation.
The recently revealed cost overrun of more than 150 percent
for the multi-mission dry dock project at the Portsmouth Naval
Shipyard (PNSY) not only costs finite resources, it risks
unacceptable delays for a project that is essential for
maintaining the submarine force. Furthermore, delays in
commencing or completing dry dock modernization will have a
great impact on our Nation's national security. In the case of
Joint Base Pearl Harbor (JBPH), the older Dry Dock 3 will be
filled in during the construction of the newer and larger Dry
Dock 5. The committee is concerned that with the last scheduled
availability for Dry Dock 3 in 2023 and with Dry Dock 5 not
scheduled for completion until 2028, there will be a
significant lack of facilities to maintain fleet readiness.
The committee is also concerned that the SIOP may not
sufficiently account for the differences between the Nation's
four historical public shipyards. Each shipyard has a unique
history, design, and local workforce with valuable knowledge of
its respective facilities that can help ensure the proper
modernization and optimization of these facilities. Rather than
relying solely on a one-size-fits-all approach that is
centralized without fully considering local conditions, the
committee urges the Navy's SIOP program office to seek more
input and engagement from these local workforces and their
installation leadership to efficiently and effectively build
and maintain shipyards that can sustain the fleet for
generations to come.
In order to ensure the Navy is appropriately managing the
PNSY multi-mission dry dock project, future JBPH dry dock, and
the overall SIOP, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees not later than October 1, 2021. The briefing shall
include:
(1) A description of the cause(s) of the cost overrun
at PNSY;
(2) Analysis on measures that could have mitigated
the cause(s) of the overrun;
(3) A discussion on the need to revise cost and
schedule projections for future SIOP projects in light
of the overrun;
(4) What steps the Navy is taking to incorporate the
lessons learned from the overrun to apply to future
SIOP work;
(5) The impact of the current military construction
timelines on JBPH shipyard availabilities in each of
the fiscal years from 2023 through 2029;
(6) A detailed plan of the construction timeline for
JBPH Dry Dock 5 and accompanying water front production
facilities; and
(7) The planned utilization of the Pearl Harbor Naval
Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility
workforce during this same period if Dry Dock 5 is not
completed before the closure of Dry Dock 3.
Staffing and resources
The committee remains concerned that the Department of
Defense has failed to adequately staff and resource several
offices and elements under the purview of the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and
Environment. For example, past reductions to headquarters
elements resulted in the Army eliminating at least thirty
percent of its personnel who oversaw privatized housing. The
committee recognizes the litany of challenges facing the
Department, including the contamination by per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances, the Military Housing Privatization
Initiative, operational and installation energy programs,
energy and military installation resilience, among others. The
committee's intent is for the Department to be able to
effectively navigate all of these challenges and ensure they
are appropriately staffed and resourced so the workforce is not
unduly overburdened.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment to
provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee, not
later than March 1, 2022, on the staffing and resourcing of the
aforementioned offices, including current and projected
staffing levels, which should include budget information for
fiscal year 2022 and 2023; recommendations on potential changes
to hiring authorities or policies that might yield a more
robust workforce; and any other aspects the Department deems
appropriate.
Study for enhancing ship readiness through digital techniques
The committee believes that the readiness of our Navy's
surface combatant and auxiliary fleets is a critical issue that
deserves enhanced attention. The committee continues to support
efforts to enhance the readiness of Military Sealift Command
(MSC) vessels through a condition-based approach. This approach
has improved availability planning, operational availability,
and readiness of MSC vessels, with potential long-term cost
avoidance in maintenance and repair of such vessels. The
committee believes that the use of similar commercial standards
and developmental approaches can be of significant benefit to
the Navy and would be compatible with the Navy's existing
program of record known as Condition-Based Maintenance Plus
(CBM+).
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to assess the potential of using a condition-based maintenance
approach similar to CBM+, utilizing digital techniques to
support other classes of surface naval vessels. The Secretary
of the Navy shall provide a briefing to the Senate Armed
Services Committee on the results of the assessment not later
than April 1, 2023. The briefing shall include a description
of: (1) Options to integrate CBM+ and other commercially-
developed condition-based program standards for ship
maintenance on other classes of Navy vessels, including the
associated costs, and (2) What would be required to deploy CBM+
or other commercially-developed condition-based program
standards for ship maintenance to other classes of Navy surface
vessels, including the associated costs, schedule, and
equipment requirements.
Study of expanding ship repair capacity
The committee is concerned the Navy is facing a fleet
sustainment predicament without clear solutions. Congressional
and Navy leaders believe that the United States needs a fleet
of 355 or more battle force ships. However, the Navy has been
unable to maintain and modernize the fleet, which has had 300
or fewer ships, over the past 5 years due to affordability
challenges; the number of shipyards able to perform maintenance
and modernization work; and limitations within shipyards,
including a paucity of dry docks. The Navy has been executing a
plan to modernize the Navy's public shipyards called the
Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program (SIOP). While the
SIOP effort is sorely needed, it will not yield substantial
increases in capacity sufficient to handle a larger fleet.
Furthermore, the committee is unaware of any Navy-identified
alternatives on the scale required to expand overall ship
repair capacity to sustain a fleet of 355 or more ships.
Accordingly, the committee believes that the Navy needs to
investigate more expansive and, perhaps, non-traditional
options for expanding the Nation's ship repair capacity.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to
conduct an analysis of options for increasing ship repair
capacity that would be necessary to support a fleet of 355 or
more ships comprised of the optimal mix of ship types,
including addressing the costs and benefits of the following
options:
(1) Expanding plant capacity at existing naval
shipyards beyond the current SIOP effort;
(2) Building new or re-opening closed naval
shipyards;
(3) Investing in modernization or expansion of
private repair yard infrastructure;
(4) Modifying or relaxing restrictions on overseas
maintenance of Navy vessels;
(5) Changing ship repair practices or processes to
enhance existing capacity;
(6) Increasing technical competence of current naval
shipyard workforce;
(7) Increasing or expanding the use of rolling
admission for multiple-award maintenance contracts;
(8) Increasing or expanding private repair activities
at Navy bases; and
(9) Any other options the Secretary may identify.
The committee directs the Secretary to submit a report on
this analysis not later than March 1, 2022, including
recommendations for implementation and funding and any
associated legislative changes.
Survivable Airborne Operations Center
The committee is encouraged by increased investment in the
Survivable Airborne Operations Center (SAOC) program to
accelerate overdue replacement of the Air Force's E-4B National
Airborne Operations Center. Given the E-4B's critical role in
the National Military Command System, the committee views this
as a high-priority recapitalization in support of a no-fail
mission. The E-4B fleet is approaching 50 years in service and
is facing capability gaps, diminishing manufacturing sources,
increased maintenance costs, and parts obsolescence as it
approaches the end of its serviceable life. The committee
understands the SAOC weapon system will be comprised of a
commercial derivative aircraft, mission system, and ground
support systems. The committee has expressed concern that E-4B
recapitalization has been under consideration since at least
2008 with limited progress and expects the Air Force to execute
fiscal year 2022 funds on-plan and budget for future years
appropriately to support a planned Milestone B decision and the
start of engineering, manufacturing, and development in early
fiscal year 2023. The committee is aware that the SAOC program
is informed by prior relevant Air Force and Department of
Defense analyses and encourages the Air Force to pursue an
acquisition approach that appropriately reflects the urgency of
this effort and delivers the best value for the taxpayer.
Sustainable technology evaluation and demonstration
The committee notes that the Department of Defense (DOD)
and civilian Federal agencies are directed by Federal
acquisition regulations and Federal statutes to implement
sustainable technologies and products when availability,
performance, and cost savings meet or exceed non-sustainable
products. The recently established DOD Sustainable Technology
Evaluation and Demonstration (STED) Program demonstrates
sustainable technologies and products against Government
performance requirements at DOD installations to validate
performance, compatibility, mission benefits, and cost savings.
The STED Program provides valued and centralized support to the
installations while reducing duplication of effort across the
services.
The committee commends the Office of the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Sustainment (ASD Sustainment) for
implementing the STED Program and conducting initial successful
sustainable technology demonstrations that: (1) Reduce health
and safety impacts to the warfighter; (2) Decrease energy
requirements; and (3) Lessen waste and environmental impacts to
our installations and bases. However, the committee believes
that more should be done to create broader awareness and
increase acceptance of sustainable alternatives that improve
maintenance, operations, training, and mission objectives.
Accordingly, the committee directs the ASD Sustainment to
provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee not
later than December 1, 2021, on its current activities and any
long-term plans to expand the STED Program and participation
across all the military departments.
Sustainment of Army health and holistic fitness system equipment
The committee notes that the U.S. Army's shift to a
Holistic Health and Fitness (H2F) system is designed as the
Army's primary investment in soldier readiness, lethality,
optimal physical and non-physical performance; to reduce injury
rates; improve rehabilitation after an injury; decrease
attrition; and increase the effectiveness and deployability of
the total Army.
The committee notes equipment and facilities are essential
elements of the H2F system and that the Soldier Performance
Readiness Center (SPRC) is an integral part of the H2F
programming, as it provides a supportive, individually focused
fitness training environment that delivers comprehensive,
integrated, and immersive physical and non-physical
programming. The committee further notes that, in addition to
the SPRC, the Army has used Army Combat Fitness Test lane
equipment, Gyms-in-a-Box (GiaBs), container gyms, and other
commercial, off-the-shelf fitness equipment and technological
solutions to help improve solider health, fitness, and
performance.
The committee also notes that the H2F system was designed
under a single governance structure to enable commanders to
improve soldier health and fitness, including an initial phase
and a sustaining phase. The committee understands, however,
that this governance structure has not been fully staffed or
resourced. Additionally, the equipment and facilities required
for the H2F system are actively being acquired, yet the
acquisition and contracting process, funding, authority,
operations, and sustainment responsibility have not been
unified under one command.
Accordingly, not later than March 1, 2022, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Army, in coordination with the
Commander, Army Training and Doctrine Command, to provide a
briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee outlining the
necessary staffing and resourcing for the Soldier Performance
Center of Excellence to provide oversight on governance,
requirements generation, and capabilities assessment. The
briefing should also include an assessment of the need to
designate a Program Executive Office as well as the planned
sustainment activities for SPRC, GiaBs, and any other equipment
utilized for H2F.
U.S. Special Operations Command Preservation of the Force and Families
Program
The committee recognizes the short and long-term physical,
mental, and emotional effects of continuous operations in high-
stress environments experienced by special operations forces
(SOF). As articulated by the Commander, U.S. Special Operations
Command (SOCOM), SOCOM represents 2 percent of the Department
of Defense's (DOD) budget and 3 percent of DOD personnel, but
has sustained more than half of the combat casualties across
DOD in recent years. The committee notes that many more special
operators suffer from psychological trauma long after their
deployments. Despite the exceptional sacrifices by our SOF
servicemembers and their families, 72 percent of wounded SOF
have been retained in military service, with 61 percent
returning to duty inside their original occupational specialty.
This remarkable achievement has been significantly enabled by
the SOCOM Preservation of the Force and Families (POTFF)
Program.
The committee strongly supports all aspects of the POTFF
initiative, to include efforts to support the psychological
health and cognitive performance of SOF. Efforts to guarantee
access to such care and eliminate the stigma associated with
seeking help are vital. The committee encourages SOCOM to
continue to prioritize the POTFF program while seeking to
measure the effectiveness of the program, institutionalize best
practices, and evolve care to meet the needs of special
operators and their families.
Underwater cut and capture
The committee understands underwater munitions continue to
pose environmental and safety threats for the Department of
Defense. High-pressure water jet technology systems have proven
their capability to safely demilitarize munitions on land and
have demonstrated the ability to demilitarize munitions
underwater as well. The committee remains concerned that
underwater munitions pose a threat that has not been
sufficiently addressed. Accordingly, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to continue to expand the use of water jet
technology systems for the removal of explosive constituents in
underwater munitions.
Universal Robotic Controller project
The committee is encouraged by the Air Force's development
of artificial intelligence robotic technologies with adaptive
autonomous intelligence, referred to as the Universal Robotic
Controller project, in order to lower growing sustainment costs
for aging and advanced complex weapon systems and increase
warfighter readiness. As such, the committee encourages the
Secretary of the Air Force to continue the development and
deployment of this technology to lessen workforce development
challenges and to provide increased capability, greater
productivity, and safer work environments.
Utilities Privatization
The committee continues to enthusiastically support the
successful utilities privatization (UP) efforts that have been
underway within the Department of Defense (DOD) for the past 25
years. The UP program has succeeded because of the continuing
support and robust oversight of the military departments.
The committee sees UP as a key enabler for the Department
and the services to achieve energy resilience, sustainability,
and mission readiness on military installations that can also
leverage and integrate advances in technology and grid
modernization in an efficient and cost-effective way. As DOD
implements efficiency standards in the coming years, it should
look to the UP program as an effective, scalable solution to
drive this change, which will provide the broader capability to
implement emerging technologies.
Because of the UP program's continuing success and cost-
effective performance, the committee strongly encourages the
DOD to continue to maximize use of the UP program as an
effective, integrated solution to construct, repair, modernize,
maintain, or replace an installation's utility system to
achieve energy reliability and resilience. The committee
further encourages the DOD to use additional resilience metrics
and performance-based calculations, which are currently
captured on UP installations and routinely reported to base
energy managers, to assess the performance outcomes and the
cost-effectiveness of the program.
The committee has been concerned with the lack of movement
by the Department in advancing UP contracting opportunities and
urges that it resume this process and leverage existing
authorities to modernize and upgrade installation
infrastructure. Accordingly, the committee directs the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in
coordination with the Assistant Secretaries of the military
departments with responsibility for energy, installations, and
environment, to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees not later than March 1, 2022, outlining the
Department's plans to continue the implementation of the UP
program.
Vieques cleanup
The committee notes that from the 1940s until 2003, the
U.S. Navy conducted bombing exercises and other live-fire
training activities on the Island of Vieques, which is located
off the coast of Puerto Rico. The Navy ceased its operations on
Vieques in 2003 but remains responsible for environmental
cleanup. Since 2005, Vieques has been included on the
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) National Priorities
List of contaminated sites. The Atlantic Fleet Weapons Training
Area--also encompassing waters surrounding parts of Vieques--
includes large amounts of unexploded ordnance and remnants of
exploded ordnance. According to the EPA, hazardous substances
at the site ``may include mercury, lead, copper, magnesium,
lithium, perchlorate, TNT, napalm, depleted uranium, PCBs,
solvents, and pesticides.'' The committee is concerned that the
contamination may have contributed to significant health
problems for the island's population of approximately 9,000
U.S. citizens. Hurricanes Irma and Maria in 2017 exacerbated
the public health problems on the island. On March 26, 2021,
the Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a report,
titled ``Efforts at Former Military Sites on Vieques and
Culebra, Puerto Rico, Are Expected to Continue through 2032''
(GAO-21-268), which stated that the ``U.S. Navy estimate[s]
that cleanup efforts will continue through fiscal year 2032.''
Given how long the cleanup already has been ongoing, and the
risk that each passing day could contribute to the population's
health problems, this newly revealed timetable is disappointing
and worrying.
Accordingly, the committee urges the Navy to accelerate
with all possible speed the cleanup without creating major
negative environmental or health impacts. The committee also
directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide annual updates on
the Navy's progress to the Senate Armed Services Committee in
the form of a briefing. The annual updates shall include any
authorities, tools, or resources the Navy estimates are needed
to accelerate the cleanup. The Secretary shall provide the
first briefing not later than March 1, 2022.
Water resource management
The committee notes that the Department of Defense has
consistently cited drought as a major current and projected
adverse impact on military installation resilience. Many
military installations, particularly in the West, rely in whole
or in part on groundwater for water supplies, and the committee
notes the ongoing and concerning depletion of many of the
aquifers from which this groundwater is drawn. The committee
applauds the significant progress that the services and
individual installations have made in reducing groundwater use.
Further, the committee notes the growing recognition of
groundwater recharge as an important element of a strategy to
address this depletion and that groundwater recharge is
currently part of a water management strategy at a number of
military installations. One military installation in
particular--Fort Huachuca, Arizona--has played a major role in
collaborative inter-governmental and public-private efforts
both to reduce groundwater usage on and off the installation
and to recharge the supporting aquifer. This effort at Fort
Huachuca involved actions under the Readiness and Environmental
Protection Integration (REPI) program. Section 2684a of title
10, United States Code, was amended by section 315(b) of the
William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) to clarify: (1) That
maintaining and improving military installation resilience is a
major purpose of the REPI program; and (2) That the interagency
collaboration authority under the REPI program pursuant to
subsection (h) of section 2684a of title 10, United States
Code, was broadened to include both the conservation and
resilience program of any Federal agency, which includes the
groundwater recharge and other water resilience programs of the
Bureau of Reclamation. The committee also notes that section
2815 of title 10, United States Code, was amended by section
315(a) of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 to extend the authority
for the construction of military installation resilience
projects, such as groundwater recharge facilities, to projects
located both on and outside of a military installation.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in preparing the report required by subsection 2827(e)
of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, to include an
assessment of: (1) The potential for greater interagency and
public-private collaboration using these and other authorities
both to reduce the use of groundwater and to recharge aquifers
as an element of a regionalized strategy to manage water
resources; and (2) The potential for construction of
groundwater recharge facilities as elements of a strategy as
defined in subsection 2827(f) of such Act, at military
installations relying in whole or in part on groundwater
resources. The committee encourages the Secretary in responding
to this requirement to consult with other regional
stakeholders, including the Western States Water Council,
academia, the Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S. Geological
Survey, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
regional partners, and entities in defense communities that
manage water resources.
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS
Subtitle A--Active Forces
End strengths for active forces (sec. 401)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Active-Duty end strengths for fiscal year 2022, as shown below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2022 Change from
FY 2021 -----------------------------------------------------
Service Authorized FY 2022 FY 2021
Request Recommendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army.......................................... 485,900 485,000 485,000 0 -900
Navy.......................................... 347,800 346,200 346,200 0 -1,600
Marine Corps.................................. 181,200 178,500 178,500 0 -2,700
Air Force..................................... 333,475 328,300 329,220 +920 -4,255
Space Force................................... n/a 8,400 8,400 0 +8,400
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total................................. 1,348,375 1,346,400 1,347,320 +920 -1,055
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The committee has taken a cautious approach to the end strength authorization for active forces. This provision
would authorize end strength levels within existing variance authority for the Army, Navy, Air Force, and
Marine Corps.
For the first time, in acknowledgment of the rapidly growing Space Force within the Department of the Air Force,
the committee has recommended a specific authorization level for the Space Force. The committee's
recommendation is 8,400 for the Space Force, which is in line with the Department's request. The new, separate
line for Space Force personnel authorization accounts for much of the decrease in the Air Force end strength
as well as the ongoing growth of the Space Force.
Authority with respect to authorized strengths for general and flag
officers within the Armed Forces for emerging requirements (sec. 402)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to reallocate a limited number of
general and flag officer authorizations among the military
departments in response to emerging requirements, as needed.
Additional authority to vary Space Force end strength (sec. 403)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Air Force to vary U.S. Space Force end
strength by a greater degree than is otherwise permitted for
the Armed Forces in order to give the Secretary additional
discretion to build and establish the U.S. Space Force.
Temporary exemption from end strength grade restrictions for the Space
Force (sec. 404)
The committee recommends a provision that would temporarily
exempt the Space Force from the grade restrictions in sections
517 and 523 of title 10, United States Code.
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces
End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
end strengths for Selected Reserve personnel for fiscal year
2022, as shown below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2022 Change from
FY 2021 -----------------------------------------------------
Service Authorized FY 2022 FY 2021
Request Recommendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard........................... 336,500 336,000 336,000 0 -500
Army Reserve.................................. 189,800 189,500 189,500 0 -300
Navy Reserve.................................. 58,800 58,600 58,600 0 -200
Marine Corps Reserve.......................... 38,500 36,800 36,800 0 -1,700
Air National Guard............................ 108,100 108,300 108,300 0 +200
Air Force Reserve............................. 70,300 70,300 70,300 0 0
Coast Guard Reserve........................... 7,000 7,000 7,000 0 0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total................................. 809,000 806,500 806,500 0 -2,500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
End strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of the reserves
(sec. 412)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
full-time support end strengths for fiscal year 2022, as shown
below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2022 Change from
FY 2021 -----------------------------------------------------
Service Authorized FY 2022 FY 2021
Request Recommendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard........................... 30,595 30,845 30,845 0 250
Army Reserve.................................. 16,511 16,511 16,511 0 0
Navy Reserve.................................. 10,215 10,293 10,293 0 78
Marine Corps Reserve.......................... 2,386 2,386 2,386 0 0
Air National Guard............................ 25,333 26,662 25,333 -1,329 0
Air Force Reserve............................. 5,256 6,003 6,003 0 747
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total................................. 90,296 92,700 91,371 -1,329 1,075
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense has gone too far in requesting increases in Active
Guard Reserve authorizations in the Air National Guard (ANG) at the expense of military technician
authorizations in the ANG. The committee is concerned about the impact of such changes on the readiness of the
U.S. Air Force.
End strengths for military technicians (dual status) (sec. 413)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military technician (dual status) end strengths for fiscal year
2022, as shown below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2022 Change from
FY 2021 -----------------------------------------------------
Service Authorized FY 2022 FY 2021
Request Recommendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard........................... 22,294 22,294 22,294 0 0
Army Reserve.................................. 6,492 6,492 6,492 0 0
Air National Guard............................ 10,994 9,885 10,994 +1,109 0
Air Force Reserve............................. 7,947 7,111 7,111 0 -836
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total................................. 47,727 45,782 46,891 +1,109 -836
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The provision would also establish limits on the number of temporary technicians authorized to be employed
within the end strengths set forth by this section to not more than 25 percent of the total authorized
strength for each component.
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense has gone too far in reducing military technician
authorizations in favor of Active Guard Reserve authorizations. The committee is concerned about the impact of
such changes on the readiness of the U.S. Air Force.
Finally, the provision would also prohibit under any circumstances the coercion of a military technician (dual
status) by a State into accepting an offer of realignment or conversion to any other military status,
including as a member of the Active, Guard, and Reserve program of a reserve component. The provision would
further specify that if a technician declines to participate in such a realignment or conversion, no further
action may be taken against the individual or the individual's position.
Maximum number of reserve personnel authorized to be on active duty for
operational support (sec. 414)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
end strengths for reserve personnel on Active Duty for
operational support for fiscal year 2022, as shown below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2022 Change from
FY 2021 -----------------------------------------------------
Service Authorized FY 2022 FY 2021
Request Recommendation Request Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard........................... 17,000 17,000 17,000 0 0
Army Reserve.................................. 13,000 13,000 13,000 0 0
Navy Reserve.................................. 6,200 6,200 6,200 0 0
Marine Corps Reserve.......................... 3,000 3,000 3,000 0 0
Air National Guard............................ 16,000 16,000 16,000 0 0
Air Force Reserve............................. 14,000 14,000 14,000 0 0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total................................. 69,200 69,200 69,200 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations
Military personnel (sec. 421)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriations for military personnel activities at the
levels identified in section 4401 of division D of this Act.
Budget Items
Military personnel funding changes
The amount authorized to be appropriated for military
personnel programs includes the following changes from the
budget request:
[Changes in millions of dollars]
Military personnel underexecution..................... -950.7
Army UFR--JTIMS exercise support...................... 67.4
Army UFR--Reserve Component EDI for Rotational Forces. 56.0
Army UFR--Reserve Component Homeland Security Ops..... 228.4
CNGB UFR--CBRN Response Forces........................ 9.2
A-10/F-35 Active duty maintainers..................... 93.0
-----------------
Total............................................. -496.6
The committee recommends a total reduction in the Military
Personnel (MILPERS) appropriation of $496.6 million to reflect
the Government Accountability Office's most recent assessment
of expected MILPERS under-execution for fiscal year 2022,
additional funding to address a number of unfunded requirements
of the Department, and additional funding to address A-10/F-35
active duty maintainers.
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY
Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy
Increase in authorized lieutenant commander billets in the Navy (sec.
501)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 605(g)(4)(B) of title 10, United States Code, to
increase the number of temporary promotions to the grade of
lieutenant commander in the Navy from 325 to 350.
Time in grade requirements (sec. 502)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 619(a) of title 10, United States Code, to authorize
the Secretary of the military department concerned to prescribe
a shorter period of service in grade, but not less than 2
years, for eligibility for consideration for promotion, in the
case of certain officers designated for limited duty.
Subtitle B--General Service Authorities and Correction of Military
Records
Part I--Selective Service Reform
Modernization of the Selective Service System (sec. 511)
The committee recommends a provision that would make
numerous amendments to the Military Selective Service Act (50
U.S.C. section 3801 et seq.) to expand registration
requirements under that Act to all Americans and to restate the
purpose and solemnity of selective service. The expansion of
registration to all Americans would take effect 1 year after
the date of the enactment of this Act.
Report on exemptions and deferments for a possible military draft (sec.
512)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Director of Selective Service, in consultation with the
Secretary of Defense and Secretary of Homeland Security, to
submit a report to the Congress reviewing exemptions and
deferments from registration, training, and service under the
Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. 3801 et seq.),
together with proposed revisions to such exemptions and
deferments.
Report on processes and procedures for appeal of denial of status or
benefits for failure to register for Selective Service (sec.
513)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Director of Selective Service, in consultation with the
Secretary of Homeland Security, the Secretary of Education, and
the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, to submit
to the appropriate committees of the Congress a report on the
processes and procedures for appeal of denial of status or
benefits for failure to register for selective service.
Responsibilities for national mobilization; personnel requirements
(sec. 514)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish within the Office of the
Secretary of Defense an Executive Agent for National
Mobilization. The provision would require the Secretary, within
one year of the date of the enactment of this Act, to submit to
the Congress a plan for obtaining inductees as part of a
mobilization timeline for the Selective Service System.
This provision addresses a recommendation of the National
Commission on Military, National, and Public Service.
Enhancements to national mobilization exercises (sec. 515)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 10208 of title 10, United States Code, to require that
major mobilization exercises required annually by that section
periodically include the processes of the Selective Service
System in preparation for the induction of personnel into the
Armed Forces under the Military Selective Service Act (50
U.S.C. 3801 et seq.).
This provision addresses a recommendation of the National
Commission on Military, National, and Public Service.
Part II--Other Matters
Military service independent racial disparity review (sec. 518)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
each Secretary of a military department to conduct an
assessment of racial disparity in military justice and
discipline processes and military personnel policies, as they
pertain to minority populations, and to submit to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives a report detailing the results of the
assessment. Finally, the provision would require the
Comptroller General of the United States to assess each
assessment and compare racial disparity in the military justice
system to racial disparity in civilian criminal justice systems
in the United States.
Appeals to Physical Evaluation Board determinations of fitness for duty
(sec. 519)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, to incorporate a formal appeals
process into the policies and procedures of the Integrated
Disability Evaluation System. The provision would ensure that
servicemembers may submit a formal appeal regarding a fitness
for duty determination to a physical evaluation board of the
military department concerned.
Extension of paid parental leave (sec. 520)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 701 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize 12
weeks of paid military leave for servicemembers that have
newborn, newly-adopted, and newly placed minor children. This
leave would ordinarily be used within 1 year of the birth,
adoption, or foster care placement of the minor child. This
provision would permit the Secretary of Defense to authorize
servicemembers to use this parental leave beyond the first year
in the event that operational requirements, professional
military education needs, or other circumstances the Secretary
deems reasonable would prevent the servicemember from taking
such leave within the first year.
Bereavement leave for members of the Armed Forces (sec. 520A)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 701 of title 10, United States Code, to create a new
category of leave for military personnel that would permit
servicemembers to take up to 2 weeks of leave in connection
with the death of a spouse or child.
Under this provision, bereavement leave would be available
to all servicemembers regardless of tenure and would only be
charged for servicemembers who have 30 or more days of
accumulated leave, and only until such members' balances drop
below 30 days of leave. Any remaining bereavement leave taken
by servicemembers whose leave balances drop below 30 days would
be non-chargeable.
Subtitle C--Prevention and Response to Sexual Assault, Harassment, and
Related Misconduct, and Other Military Justice Matters
DoD Safe Helpline authorization to perform intake of official
restricted and unrestricted reports for eligible adult sexual
assault victims (sec. 521)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 584 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81) to authorize the
Department of Defense Safe Helpline to receive sexual assault
reports in both unrestricted and restricted forms, and to
provide support to victims making such reports.
Assessment of relationship between command climate and the prevention
and adjudication of military sexual misconduct (sec. 522)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to require the Secretaries of the military
departments to conduct no fewer than six independent reviews at
military installations under the control of the Secretary
concerned assessing the command climate at such installations,
to include a review of that installation's programs to prevent
and respond to sexual assault and sexual harassment,
organizational climate, gender discrimination, and support of
survivors. The provision would require the Secretaries
concerned to conduct the assessments at three installations
with the highest risk of sexual assault and three installations
with the lowest risk of sexual assault, as defined by the
Secretary of Defense, for that military department.
The provision would require the assessments required under
this section to be completed not later than 18 months after the
date of the enactment of this Act and for the assessments to be
transmitted by the Secretary of Defense to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
not later than 30 days after each assessment's completion.
Policy for ensuring the annual report regarding sexual assaults
involving members of the Armed Forces includes information on
race and ethnicity of victims (sec. 523)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to include in the annual Sexual Assault
Prevention and Response Office report information on the race
and ethnicity of victims and accused individuals to the maximum
extent practicable, allowing for exclusion of such information,
if necessary, based on privacy concerns, impacts on
accountability efforts, or other matters of importance, as
determined by the Secretary.
Department of Defense tracking of allegations of retaliation by victims
of sexual assault or sexual harassment and related persons
(sec. 524)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to designate a component within the Office
of the Secretary of Defense to document and track allegations
of retaliation submitted by a victim of a sexual assault or
sexual harassment, an individual charged with providing
services or support to a victim, a witness or bystander to
sexual assault or sexual harassment, or any other person
associated with an allegation of sexual assault or sexual
harassment.
The committee understands that retaliation related to a
sexual assault or sexual harassment can take the form of
reprisal or restriction, cruelty or maltreatment, or ostracism,
and that allegations of same may be investigated by the
Department of Defense Inspector General, another inspector
general, a military criminal investigative organization or
other law enforcement, a commander, or another organization,
officer, or employee of the Department.
The committee believes that centralizing the documentation
and tracking of all such allegations of retaliation in a single
office in the Office of the Secretary of Defense will both
improve the fidelity of annual reports on retaliation required
by section 543 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) and provide more accurate
data to inform the Department's development, execution, and
evaluation of retaliation prevention and response programs.
Special Victims Counsel representation of civilian victims of sex-
related offenses (sec. 525)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1044e(a)(2) of title 10, United States Code, to
authorize special victim's counsel representation for civilian
victims of alleged sex-related offenses committed by
individuals subject to the jurisdiction of the Uniform Code of
Military Justice.
Notice to victims of further administrative action following a
determination not to refer to trial by court-martial (sec. 526)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 549 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) to clarify that the
provision of information required by that section is not
subject to the provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C.
552a). Section 549 requires a commander, who has determined not
to refer an allegation of sexual assault to trial by court-
martial, to keep the victim in such a case periodically
informed of the status of such further administrative action
that may be taken against the accused.
Recommendations on separate punitive article in the Uniform Code of
Military Justice on violent extremism (sec. 527)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a
report containing such recommendations as the Secretary
considers appropriate with respect to the establishment of a
separate punitive article in the Uniform Code of Military
Justice (chapter 47 of title 10, United States Code) on violent
extremism. The report would be required to be submitted not
later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act.
Determination and reporting of missing, absent unknown, absent without
leave, and duty status-whereabouts unknown service members
(sec. 528)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to instruct the Secretary of each military
department to conduct a comprehensive review of that
Department's policies and procedures for determining and
reporting servicemembers as missing, absent unknown, absent
without leave, or duty status-whereabouts unknown.
The provision would further require a review and update of
installation-level procedures, with a focus on force
protection, enhanced security for servicemembers living on a
military installation, and prioritization of protocols for
reporting at the earliest practicable time to local and Federal
law enforcement when a servicemember is determined to be
missing, absent unknown, absent without leave, or duty status-
whereabouts unknown.
Conduct unbecoming an officer (sec. 529)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
Article 133 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (10 U.S.C.
933) by striking the words ``and a gentleman'' from the title
and text of the current article prohibiting conduct unbecoming
an officer and a gentleman.
Analysis of the use of non-judicial punishment (sec. 530)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to conduct statistical analysis on non-
judicial punishments with respect to race, ethnicity, gender,
rank, and grade.
Sexual Assault Response Coordinator Military Occupational Specialty
(sec. 530A)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act on various elements concerning a
military occupational specialty for Sexual Assault Response
Coordinators.
Implementation of recommendations of the Independent Review Commission
on Sexual Assault in the Military (sec. 530B)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to implement the recommendations of the
Independent Review Commission (IRC) contained within Lines of
Effort 2, 3, and 4, as reflected in the IRC's 2021 report
entitled ``Hard Truths and the Duty to Change: Recommendations
from the Independent Review Commission on Sexual Assault in the
Military.''
Subtitle D--Military Justice Reform and Sexual Assault Prevention
Part I--Military Justice Matters
Special victim prosecutors (sec. 531)
The committee recommends a provision that would add a new
article 24a to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ),
codified at section 824a of title 10, United States Code, that
would require the Secretaries of the military departments to
detail commissioned officers to serve as special victim
prosecutors and assistant special victim prosecutors. The
provision would require that such prosecutors be certified by
the Judge Advocate General of the armed force concerned to be
qualified by reason of education, training, experience, and
temperament for such duty.
The provision would grant exclusive authority to
prosecutors detailed under this provision to determine whether
a reported offense is a special victim offense for the purposes
of the section and to exercise authority over any such offense
under the UCMJ. The provision would authorize prosecutors
detailed pursuant to the section to exercise authority over any
reported offense that the prosecutor determines to be related
to the special victim offense or committed by a person alleged
to have committed a special victim offense.
The provision would grant exclusive authority to
prosecutors detailed under the section to: (1) Dismiss charges
and specifications or make a motion to dismiss charges and
specifications; (2) Refer charges and specifications for trial
by special or general court-martial; (3) Enter into a plea
agreement; and (4) Determine if an ordered rehearing is
impracticable.
Finally, the provision would authorize a convening
authority to exercise any of the authorities granted to
convening authorities under the UCMJ, notwithstanding the
exclusive authority granted to prosecutors detailed under the
section, in the event such prosecutors decline to exercise
authority granted to them under the section.
Policies with respect to special victim prosecutors (sec. 532)
The committee recommends a provision that would add a new
section 1044f to title 10, United States Code, and require the
Secretary of Defense to establish policies with respect to the
appropriate mechanisms and procedures that the Secretaries of
the military departments shall establish and carry out relating
to the activities of special victim prosecutors.
Definition of military magistrate, special victim offense, and special
victim prosecutor (sec. 533)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 801 of title 10, United States Code, to add definitions
to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for ``military
magistrate,'' ``special victim offense,'' and ``special victim
prosecutor.'' The provision would define special victim offense
as an offense under Articles 117a, 120, 120b, 120c, 128b, 130,
or 132 of the UCMJ (10 U.S.C. 917a, 920, 920b, 920c, 928b, 930,
or 932); conspiracy, solicitation, or attempt to commit such
offense under Articles 81, 82, or 80 of the UCMJ (10 U.S.C.
881, 882, or 880); and the standalone offenses of sexual
harassment and child pornography under Article 134 of the UCMJ
(10 U.S.C. 934).
Clarification of applicability of domestic violence and stalking to
dating partners (sec. 534)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
Articles 128b and 130 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice
(10 U.S.C. 928b and 10 U.S.C. 930) to add dating partners to
the victims covered by those articles (criminalizing domestic
violence and stalking).
Clarification relating to who may convene courts-martial (sec. 535)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
Article 22 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (10 U.S.C.
822) to clarify that a commanding officer shall not be
considered an accuser in a general or special court-martial to
which charges and specifications were referred by a special
victim prosecutor.
Inclusion of sexual harassment as general punitive article (sec. 536)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
President to amend the Manual for Courts-Martial to include
sexual harassment as a standalone offense under article 134 of
the Uniform Code of Military Justice (10 U.S.C. 934).
Determinations of impracticability of rehearing (sec. 537)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
Article 65 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (10 U.S.C.
865) to provide exclusive authority to a special victim
prosecutor to make a determination on behalf of the Government
that a rehearing authorized by a military justice appellate
authority in a special victim case is impracticable and, if so,
to dismiss any affected charge.
Plea agreements (sec. 538)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
Article 53a of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (10 U.S.C.
853a) to provide exclusive authority, in special victim cases,
to special victim prosecutors to enter into plea agreements on
behalf of the United States.
Opportunity to obtain witness and other evidence in trials by court-
martial (sec. 539)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
Article 46 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (10 U.S.C.
846) to authorize special victim prosecutors to issue pre-
referral investigative subpoenas.
Former jeopardy (sec. 540)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
Article 44 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (10 U.S.C.
844) to clarify that jeopardy attaches when a special victim
prosecutor dismisses charges or otherwise terminates a court-
martial in certain cases.
Advice to convening authority before referral for trial (sec. 541)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
Article 34 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (10 U.S.C.
834) to provide a special victim prosecutor with exclusive
authority to refer charges alleging special victim offenses for
trial by a special or general court-martial.
Preliminary hearing (sec. 542)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
Article 32 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (10 U.S.C.
832) to authorize a special victim prosecutor to convene a
preliminary hearing and to receive the preliminary hearing
officer's report. The provision would also require that the
preliminary hearing officer in a special victim case be a
military judge or military magistrate.
Detail of trial counsel (sec. 543)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
Article 27 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (10 U.S.C.
827) to require that for each general and special court-martial
for which charges and specifications were referred by a special
victim prosecutor, that a special victim prosecutor or
assistant special victim prosecutor be detailed as trial
counsel for such case. The provision would also specify
authority to detail assistant trial counsel in such cases.
Sentencing reform (sec. 544)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
Articles 53, 53a, 56, and 66 of the Uniform Code of Military
Justice (10 U.S.C. 853, 853a, 856, and 866) to require military
judge-alone sentencing in non-capital courts-martial subject to
the President's establishment of sentencing parameters and
criteria. The provision would also provide that, for capital
cases, panel members would determine whether the sentence would
include death or life without parole, or such other lesser
punishment as may be determined by the military judge, and that
the military judge would then sentence the accused in
accordance with the determination of the panel members.
Uniform, document-based data system (sec. 545)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a single mechanism and
process into and through which records, data, and information
would be collected, tracked, and maintained regarding the
reporting, investigation, processing, adjudication, and final
disposition of all offenses under the Uniform Code of Military
Justice arising in any component of the Department of Defense.
Primary prevention workforce (sec. 546)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a Primary Prevention
Workforce to provide a comprehensive and integrated program
across the Department of Defense for the prevention of sexual
assault, sexual harassment, domestic violence, child abuse and
maltreatment, problematic juvenile sexual behavior, suicide,
workplace violence, and substance misuse.
Annual primary prevention research agenda (sec. 547)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to annually publish a Department of
Defense research agenda for that fiscal year focused on the
prevention of sexual assault, sexual harassment, domestic
violence, child abuse and maltreatment, problematic juvenile
sexual behavior, suicide, workplace violence, and substance
misuse.
Full functionality of certain advisory committees and panels (sec. 548)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to reconstitute the Defense Advisory
Committee on the Investigation, Prosecution, and Defense of
Sexual Assault in the Armed Forces, the Defense Advisory
Committee for the Prevention of Sexual Misconduct, and the
Military Justice Review Panel.
Military defense counsel parity (sec. 549)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to ensure parity of resources between
military prosecutors and military defense counsel, and that
military defense counsel in special victim cases possess
sufficient training and experience.
Resourcing (sec. 550)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a
report, not later than March 1, 2022, detailing the resourcing
necessary to implement this part of this subtitle.
Applicability to the United States Coast Guard (sec. 551)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to consult and enter into an agreement
with the Secretary of Homeland Security to apply the provisions
of this subtitle to the U.S. Coast Guard when it is operating
as a service in the Department of Homeland Security.
Effective date (sec. 552)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
an effective date for the provisions contained in this subtitle
of not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this
Act.
Part II--Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act
Short title (sec. 561)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish a
short title for the series of provisions in this part of this
subtitle as ``Military Justice Improvement and Increasing
Prevention Act of 2021''.
Improvement of determinations on disposition of charges for certain
offenses under UCMJ with authorized maximum sentence of
confinement of more than one year (sec. 562)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
that the determination on whether to cause charges to be
preferred on an accused or to refer charges for certain
offenses to general or special courts-martial be made by trial
counsel in the grade of O-6 or above, appointed by the chiefs
of the military services for this purpose, rather than by
convening authorities as they are currently defined under the
Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The provision would
require that these officers not be in the victim's or accused's
chain of command. The provision would apply to the following
articles of the UCMJ: 93a, 117a, 118, 119, 119a, 119b, 120,
120a, 120b, 120c, 121, 121a, 121b, 122, 124, 124a, 124b, 125,
126, 127, 128(b) and (c), 128a, 128b, 130, 131, 131a, 131b,
131c, 131d, 131e, 131f, 131g, and 132. The provision would also
apply to the standalone offenses of child pornography,
negligent homicide, indecent conduct, indecent language, and
pandering and prostitution under general article 134 of the
UCMJ. Finally, the provision would apply to the offenses of
conspiracy, solicitation, and attempt to commit an offense
listed above under articles 81, 82, and 80 of the UCMJ.
Modification of officers authorized to convene general and special
courts-martial for certain offenses under UCMJ with authorized
maximum sentence of confinement of more than one year (sec.
563)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
Article 22 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) (10
U.S.C. 822) to modify the officers authorized to convene
general and special courts-martial for certain offenses under
the UCMJ with maximum sentences of confinement of more than 1
year.
Discharge using otherwise authorized personnel and resources (sec. 564)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretaries of the military departments and the Secretary of
Homeland Security (with respect to the U.S. Coast Guard) to
implement the provisions contained in this part of this
subtitle using personnel, funds, and resources otherwise
authorized by law.
Monitoring and assessment of modification of authorities by Defense
Advisory Committee on Investigation, Prosecution, and Defense
of Sexual Assault in the Armed Forces (sec. 565)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Defense Advisory Committee on Investigation, Prosecution, and
Defense of Sexual Assault in the Armed Forces to monitor the
implementation of the provisions contained in this part of this
subtitle.
Limitation on modifications to sexual assault reporting procedures
(sec. 566)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Secretary of Defense from amending section 4 of enclosure 4
of Department of Defense Instruction 6495.02, relating to
Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program Procedures.
Professionalization of military prosecutors (sec. 567)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to increase training to certain
prosecutors on the proper conduct, presentation, and handling
of sexual assault and domestic violence cases.
Increased training and education on military sexual assault (sec. 568)
The committee recommends a provision that would increase
training and education on military sexual assault for certain
officers, senior enlisted personnel, officer candidates, and
cadets and midshipmen at the military academies and in the
Reserve Officer Training Corps.
Increasing the physical security of military installations (sec. 569)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a survey of lodging and living
spaces on military installations to assess various physical
security measures in place and to develop and carry out a
program to increase physical security at military installations
based on the survey.
Effective date and applicability (sec. 570)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
that the provisions contained in this part of this subtitle
become effective 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act.
Subtitle E--Member Education, Training, and Transition
Modification of grant program supporting science, technology,
engineering, and math education in the Junior Reserve Officers'
Training Corps to include quantum information sciences (sec.
571)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapter 102 of title 10, United States Code, to add quantum
information sciences to the list of covered subjects for the
program to support science, technology, engineering, and math
education in the Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps.
Allocation of authority for nominations to the military service
academies in the event of the death, resignation, or expulsion
from office of a member of Congress (sec. 572)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
chapters 753, 853, and 953 of title 10, United States Code, to
allocate unused nominations to the military service academies
resulting from the death, resignation, or expulsion from office
of a Member of Congress to the remaining Senator or Senators
from the same State as the departed Member.
Troops-to-Teachers Program (sec. 573)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1154 of title 10, United States Code, to require the
Secretary of Defense to carry out the Troops-to-Teachers
Program. The provision would sunset the program for new
entrants on July 1, 2025, unless subsequently extended.
Finally, the provision would require annual reports from the
Secretary on a number of performance and outcome metrics.
The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to conduct an assessment of the Troops-to-Teachers
Program authorized by section 1154 of title 10, United States
Code, since that program's inception. The assessment shall
include: (1) The numbers of teachers placed; (2) The quality of
teachers; (3) Placements, especially at ``high need'' schools;
(4) Diversity of teachers placed; (5) The duration of their
employment; (6) The satisfaction of the gaining local education
agencies; (7) The budgetary resources expended; and (8) The
overall effectiveness of the program in producing highly
qualified teachers from separating members of the Armed Forces
and placing them in local educational agencies with
demonstrated need for teachers.
Finally, the assessment shall include data provided by the
Department by the annual reports required by the provision. The
Comptroller General shall provide a report on this assessment
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House
of Representatives not later than March 1, 2023.
Combating foreign malign influence (sec. 574)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 589E of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-
283) to create a working group to assist the official
designated to coordinate and integrate the training program
mandated under this section. The working group would assist in
identifying mediums and themes used by covered foreign
countries in foreign malign influence campaigns directed
against servicemembers and Department of Defense civilian
employees. The provision would also require the working group
to assist in coordinating and integrating the training program
in order to enhance and strengthen servicemember and Department
of Defense civilian employee awareness of and defenses against
foreign malign influence, including by bolstering information
literacy.
Prohibition on implementation by United States Air Force Academy of
civilian faculty tenure system (sec. 575)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Secretary of Defense from implementing a civilian faculty
tenure system for the United States Air Force Academy until a
report explaining the purpose and detailed plans for the
proposed system is delivered to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives.
Subtitle F--Military Family Readiness and Dependents' Education
Certain assistance to local educational agencies that benefit
dependents of military and civilian personnel (sec. 581)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$50.0 million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for
continuation of the Department of Defense (DOD) assistance
program to local educational agencies impacted by enrollment of
dependent children of military members and DOD civilian
employees.
The provision would also authorize $10.0 million in
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for impact aid
payments for children with disabilities as enacted by the Floyd
D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2001 (Public Law 106-398), using the formula set forth in
section 363 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001, for continuation of
Department of Defense assistance to local educational agencies
that benefit eligible dependents with severe disabilities.
Subsection (b)(2) of the provision would authorize the
Secretary of Defense to use an additional $10.0 million for
payments to local educational agencies determined by the
Secretary to have higher concentrations of military children
with severe disabilities. Subsection (b)(3) of the provision
would require the Secretary to brief the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives by
March 31, 2022, on the Department's evaluation of each local
educational agency with higher concentrations of military
children with severe disabilities and its subsequent
determination of the amounts of impact aid each such agency
should receive.
Pilot program to establish employment fellowship opportunities for
military spouses (sec. 582)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to establish a pilot program to
provide employment for military spouses through a fellowship
with employers across a variety of industries.
Subtitle G--Other Matters and Reports
Amendments to additional Deputy Inspector General of the Department of
Defense (sec. 591)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 554 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283)
that established an additional Deputy Inspector General to
improve oversight of diversity and inclusion programs of the
Department of Defense, as well as programs designed to prevent
and respond to incidents of extremism within the Armed Forces.
The provision would clarify that this official would report to
the Inspector General of the Department of Defense.
Inclusion of Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps data in diversity
and inclusion reporting (sec. 592)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 113 of title 10, United States Code, to include in
reports on diversity and inclusion required by that section,
information pertaining to graduates of the Senior Reserve
Officers' Training Corps program.
Modified deadline for establishment of special purpose adjunct to Armed
Services Vocational Aptitude Battery test (sec. 593)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 594 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) to
modify the deadline for establishment of the special purpose
adjunct to the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery
required by that section.
Reports on Air Force personnel performing duties of a Nuclear and
Missile Operations Officer (13N) (sec. 594)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force to report on the Nuclear and Missile
Operations Officer (13N) career field through fiscal year 2027.
The committee notes that the 13N career field has often been
over-stressed in terms of work hours and deployments inside the
United States, with the COVID-19 pandemic impacting the career
field particularly hard. The committee commends the Air Force
for recognizing this challenge early and programming additional
resources for additional officers in the 13N field. However,
the committee believes, especially given the transition to the
Ground Based Strategic Deterrent, that further oversight of the
health of the 13N career field is required.
Reports on security force personnel performing protection level one
duties (sec. 595)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force to provide to the congressional
defense committees a report annually for fiscal years 2023
through 2027 on the status of Air Force security forces
dedicated to the defense of protection level one (PL-1) assets.
The report would include the numbers of such personnel, mission
and installation breakdowns of such personnel, retention rates,
training details, and the status of vehicle replacements at PL-
1 installations.
The role of the security forces in intercontinental
ballistic missile fields are of particular concern to the
committee. Much progress has been made to ensure that arming
and use-of-force fitness standards can be used instead of the
Personal Reliability Program, and that the security forces are
rotated through the missile fields and other PL-1 installations
on a regular basis. However, issues remain, such as replacing
the BearCat and high-mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles
(currently used by the security forces) with alternatives more
suitable to the long distances and off-road conditions
encountered in the missile field security mission.
Items of Special Interest
Active-Duty service obligations for graduates of cybersecurity courses
The committee remains interested in the recruitment and
retention of military personnel trained in cybersecurity. The
Department of Defense (DOD) invests in a number of incentives
and training to develop cybersecurity personnel with valuable
qualifications. Given the substantial demand for personnel with
these qualifications in the private sector, the committee is
concerned about DOD's ability to retain trained military
cybersecurity personnel. Therefore, the committee directs the
Comptroller General of the United States to review DOD
recruitment and retention of cybersecurity military personnel.
The Comptroller General shall provide a briefing with
preliminary observations of this review to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
not later than March 7, 2022, followed by a report to be
delivered on a mutually agreeable date. This review shall
include: (1) The extent to which the DOD met overall
cybersecurity-related staffing targets; (2) A discussion of
recruitment and retention of the military cybersecurity
workforce; and (3) The extent to which DOD has utilized
business case analyses to explore the use of increased Active-
Duty service obligations and other policies to improve
recruiting and retention of the military cybersecurity
workforce. In addition, the report should include any other
related information the Comptroller General determines to be
appropriate.
Appointment of Chiropractors as Commissioned Officers
Section 505 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 102-484) authorized the military
departments to appoint ``chiropractors who are qualified under
regulations'' issued by the military departments as
commissioned officers in the Army Medical Specialist Corps,
Navy Medical Service Corps, or Air Force Biomedical Service
Corps. Since enactment of section 505, servicemembers have
experienced decades of deployment-related musculoskeletal
injuries that can limit their combat effectiveness.
The committee is aware that over 80 civilian chiropractors
provide care to Active-Duty servicemembers at 51 military
medical treatment facilities in the United States and overseas.
These practitioners can offer non-surgical alternative
treatments and therapies to help servicemembers recover more
quickly from musculoskeletal injuries. The Department of
Defense has no capability, however, to provide chiropractic
services in deployed environments to address the effects of
such injuries there. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than March 1, 2022, that assesses the feasibility of
using the Department's statutory authority to commission
chiropractors as military officers. The assessment shall
include: (1) Any combatant commander requirements for
chiropractors as part of operating or generating forces; (2)
The potential role of military chiropractors in deployed
medical units; (3) The conditions under which the Department
would deem military chiropractors as a critical wartime medical
specialty; and (4) Any recommendations, as may be required, for
the committees to clarify related authorities or adjust end-
strength allowances for the commissioning of chiropractors as
military officers.
Asian American and Pacific Islander Medal of Honor Review
Section 586 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) required the Secretaries
of the military departments to conduct a review of the service
records of each Asian American and Native American Pacific
Islander war veteran who was awarded the Distinguished-Service
Cross, the Navy Cross, or the Air Force Cross during the Korean
War or the Vietnam War. The committee understands that the
services have completed their reviews and submitted
recommendations to the Department of Defense. After the
Department finalizes its review of the recommendations of the
military departments, but not later than March 1, 2022, the
Secretary of Defense shall provide a briefing to the Committees
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on its findings, to include the number of
affected veterans recommended for an upgrade to the Medal of
Honor.
Career Intermission Program
The committee supports the Career Intermission Program
(CIP) and continued efforts to expand and improve upon the
accessibility of this program across the Department of Defense.
CIP helps the Armed Forces retain talented, capable, and
diverse servicemembers. The committee urges the military
departments to establish flexible options for CIP to further
expand access to this unique retention tool. Decreasing the
lead time necessary to apply for the program and expanding
enrollment eligibility may be easy ways to make the program
more attractive to servicemembers. The committee encourages the
military departments to establish appropriate public affairs
outreach to ensure that servicemembers are aware of the
program.
Comptroller General of the United States review of certain professional
development activities of Department of Defense Education
Activity employees
The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to conduct an assessment of professional development
activities offered or required by the Department of Defense
Education Activity (DODEA) of teacher and other school-level
employees, including an assessment of how useful and effective
DODEA school-level employees find this professional
development. The report shall also include a comparative review
of DODEA's professional development activities for school-level
employees and a representative sample of such activities in
school districts in the United States, as selected by the
Comptroller General. Finally, the report shall include an
assessment of the utility of DODEA's requirement that certain
school-level employees perform 24 hours of uncompensated
professional development activities each school quarter outside
of normal working hours.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to provide a
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives on the results of this assessment
not later than April 1, 2022.
Comptroller General of the United States review of Department of
Defense payroll system for employees of the Department of
Defense Education Activity
The Department of Defense (DOD) Education Activity (DODEA)
is a DOD Field Activity that operates DOD's school system. A
February 4, 2021, Government Accountability Office (GAO)
report, titled ``K-12 Education: U.S. Military Families
Generally Have the Same Schooling Options as Other Families and
Consider Multiple Factors When Selecting Schools'' (GAO-21-80),
observed that the majority of DODEA's 160 accredited schools
were located on overseas installations. Educators and other
specialized DODEA employees, particularly overseas employees,
are entitled to certain allowances and differentials not
applicable to similar DODEA employees inside the United States.
Payroll accounting for DODEA employees is part of the DOD
civilian payroll system and is processed by the Defense Finance
and Accounting Service (DFAS). Given that auditors have
identified numerous internal control deficiencies in the DOD
and DFAS's accounting systems, the committee is concerned about
the ability of the DOD payroll system to adequately process and
provide pay for these DODEA employees.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to provide a report to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than October 1, 2022, on the DOD payroll system as it
pertains to DODEA. The report shall include the following
elements:
(1) The extent to which DOD has implemented prior
directives to improve its payroll system for DODEA,
particularly for overseas employees;
(2) The extent to which DODEA overseas employees' pay
is provided in a timely manner and calculated properly
to include base pay and any additional allowances and
differentials; and
(3) Any other matters the Comptroller General deems
appropriate.
Comptroller General review of military personnel policies related to
United States Indo-Pacific Command
The committee supports the current Department of Defense
(DOD) effort to evaluate and revise various personnel-related
policies to focus more on the security challenges posed by
China. This review process should include a consideration of
the need to emphasize the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM)
area of responsibility in preparing servicemembers for future
armed conflict.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to review the Department's efforts to focus
professional military education and promotion policies to
ensure military personnel have adequate education, exposure,
and expertise in the Indo-Pacific theater and the countries and
territories contained therein.
The Comptroller General shall provide a briefing with
preliminary observations of this review to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
not later than May 1, 2022, followed by a report to be
delivered on a mutually agreeable date. The review shall
include: (1) The extent to which current promotion boards
consider service in INDOPACOM and the other combatant commands
as part of the board process; (2) A discussion of current DOD
efforts to re-orient professional military education toward the
security challenges posed by China; and (3) Any related
information the Comptroller General determines to be
appropriate.
Comptroller General review of Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps
program contributions to a diverse officer corps
The Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) program
is critical for producing officers from the Nation's colleges
and universities to meet the leadership and readiness needs of
the military services. ROTC units have a geographically diverse
presence at hundreds of colleges and universities throughout
the United States and its territories, which is intended to
help produce officers that reflect the communities they serve.
However, the committee is concerned about the extent to which
this is currently being achieved.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to provide preliminary observations to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives by February 24, 2022, on the extent to which
ROTC programs are contributing to a racially, ethnically, and
socioeconomically diverse and representative military, with a
report to follow on an agreed upon date. The report shall
address the following elements:
(1) Trends in the racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic
makeup of military officers commissioned through ROTC
programs;
(2) The extent to which the current distribution of
ROTC units across U.S. colleges and universities
contributes to the military services' desire for a
diverse and representative officer corps;
(3) The extent to which the military services
periodically review and, as necessary, modify ROTC
programs to help ensure that they are maximizing
opportunities to recruit individuals who will
contribute to a diverse and representative officer
corps; and
(4) Any other areas that the Comptroller General
considers relevant to the review.
Connecting certain servicemembers with community-based organizations
through state veterans agencies
Section 570F of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) required the Secretary of
Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to seek to enter
into memorandums of understanding or other agreements with
State veterans agencies or related entities to connect retiring
and separating servicemembers with benefits or services
provided by community-based organizations. The committee notes
the significant, helpful contribution this section could have
for servicemembers undergoing retirement, discharge, or release
from the Armed Forces. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than June 1, 2022, on the Department of Defense's
efforts to implement section 570F. The briefing shall include a
description of any modifications to form DD-2648 that would
allow a servicemember to provide contact information
voluntarily to State veterans agencies. Additionally, the
briefing shall provide the number and types of memorandums of
understanding or other agreements completed with such agencies
(or related entities) to facilitate communication of available
services and benefits with certain servicemembers.
Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency briefing on recovery of
servicemembers' remains
As the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency (DPAA) works to
account for missing servicemembers, the committee believes that
there is particular urgency in addressing field recoveries
since those remains are most at risk. Therefore, the committee
directs the Director, DPAA, to provide a briefing to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than February 1, 2022, outlining a
detailed plan and timeline describing how DPAA will account for
remains other than those from graves of the unknown. The plan
shall also address the extent to which DPAA will collaborate
with external partners to maximize recoveries of such remains.
Department of Defense civilian workforce career developmental programs
The committee notes that skill gaps in hiring, development,
and retention of personnel in Science, Technology, Engineering,
Mathematics, and Manufacturing (STEMM), Cyber, Artificial
Intelligence, acquisition workforce, financial management and
other critical functional areas required by the National
Defense Strategy (NDS) persist, even after numerous legislative
initiatives that provided greater flexibility in setting the
terms and conditions of employment. Each military department
has created its own separate career program brands for the same
kinds of skills, often with their own separate developmental
paths and certification and training requirements that create a
cumbersome application process and may at times impede
consideration of otherwise qualified candidates for civilian
jobs. The committee believes that this fragmented approach does
not meet the needs of the Department.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives not later than January
1, 2022, on its plan to streamline civilian personnel
management across the Department of Defense (DOD) with the goal
of further developing the skills the Department needs to meet
the priorities of the NDS while maintaining an apolitical
civilian workforce. The plan should at least address the
following elements:
(1) Emphasis on competitive hiring using objective
assessments of qualifications in lieu of rigid tools
for classification;
(2) Promoting innovative management of the Federal
workforce;
(3) Using data analytics to establish a systematic
process to ensure the current and future DOD workforce
is aligned with the current and future mission of the
Department;
(4) Use of subject matter expert hiring panels to
limit rigid assessments of qualifications;
(5) Recognition of alternative developmental paths to
establish qualifications required for positions;
(6) Emphasis on diversity and inclusion;
(7) Increasing use of standing registers of qualified
applicants to fill open positions;
(8) Emphasis on active recruitment methods through
visits to high schools, trade schools, colleges,
universities, job fairs, and community groups rather
than passive recruitment through job postings;
(9) Utilizing standardized and uniform Government-
wide job classification;
(10) Reducing cumbersome application processes,
including removing the requirement to use Federal
resumes; and
(11) Legislative proposals required to achieve these
outcomes.
Department of Defense implementation of open Government Accountability
Office recommendations concerning sexual harassment and sexual
assault
According to information provided to the committee by the
Government Accountability Office (GAO), since 2006, GAO has
issued 18 reports containing 130 recommendations that address
the continuum of unwanted sexual behavior in the military. Of
these 130 recommendations, a significant number remain open and
unresolved by the Department of Defense (DOD). These unresolved
matters include high priority recommendations, as characterized
by GAO, concerning the incorporation into the Department's
sexual harassment policies principles contained in the Center
for Disease Control's framework for sexual violence prevention;
the requirement that DOD's Office of Diversity Management and
Equal Opportunity develop and aggressively implement an
oversight framework to guide the Department's efforts to
prevent and address incidents of sexual harassment involving
servicemembers; and the requirement that the Department develop
a strategy for holding individuals in positions of leadership
accountable for promoting, supporting, and enforcing the
Department's sexual harassment programs and policies.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, not later
than December 31, 2021, to implement the open and unresolved
GAO recommendations cited above, or, if the Secretary
determines that implementing one or more recommendations by
that date is impracticable, to notify GAO of that
determination, and provide a briefing to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
not later than February 1, 2022, on the reasons and status of
such open recommendations.
Education in the Department of Defense
The committee is aware that servicemembers often face the
competing demands of work, education, and family needs, and
that it can be difficult to keep all three in balance.
Education remains important for developing military personnel
for greater responsibility and eventual promotion. The
committee encourages the Department to take any steps it deems
necessary to ensure that servicemembers are well-equipped to
balance these competing demands adequately as they continue to
serve in the Armed Forces.
Establish a Naval Community College
The committee is supportive of the efforts by the
Department of the Navy to establish a Naval Community College
(USNCC), the primary function of which is to provide post-
secondary, lower division education programs and the attendant
support services to enlisted personnel of the Navy and Marine
Corps. As the Navy conducts its initial USNCC pilot to
determine the feasibility of process, the committee remains
interested in the educational direction and benchmarks of the
USNCC. The committee directs the Assistant Secretary of the
Navy (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) to provide a briefing to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives not later than 30 days after the completion of
the pilot program on the primary competencies gained by sailor
participants, with a focus on high-skilled competencies.
Foreign language testing and tracking
Foreign language skills, regional expertise, and cultural
knowledge are critical competencies for ensuring global
operational readiness. The committee is interested in better
understanding how the Department of Defense (DOD) identifies
and tracks foreign language proficiency resident in the force
and the extent to which initial entry servicemembers who have
indicated foreign language proficiency are able to gain access
to screening. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a report to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives by September 1,
2022, on the Department's administration and tracking of the
screening and testing of military recruits with self-professed
language proficiency in accordance with Department of Defense
Instruction (DODI) 5160.71 DOD Language Testing Program.
The report shall include the following elements:
(1) The total number of initial entry servicemembers
from January 1, 2019 to January 1, 2022, who self-
profess proficiency in a foreign language described in
subsection (a), broken down by service and Strategic
Language List category for each year;
(2) The total number of Defense Language Proficiency
Tests or Oral Proficiency Interviews administered per
year to those initial entry servicemembers with self-
professed proficiency in a foreign language from
January 1, 2019 to January 1, 2022, broken down by
service and Strategic Language List category;
(3) The average amount of time between when initial
entry servicemembers with self-professed knowledge of a
foreign language were identified and when they were
tested, broken down by service, Strategic Language List
category, and year;
(4) A description of each military service's
procedures to screen and track all newly commissioned
officer personnel for language aptitude or capability
as outlined in DODI 5160.71 Enclosure 1, paragraph 9,
section f;
(5) A description of each military service's
procedures to administer the Defense Language
Proficiency Test to military recruits or enlisted
personnel who have a self-professed knowledge of a
foreign language during their first term of enlistment
as outlined in DODI 5160.71 Enclosure 1, paragraph 9,
section m; and
(6) Any additional resources that would support the
timely administration of the Defense Language
Proficiency Test or Oral Proficiency Interview to
recruits, enlisted personnel, and newly commissioned
officer candidates who profess to have language
proficiency as early in the term of service as
possible.
The committee encourages the Department of Defense to
continue to place a high priority on foreign language
proficiency programs to ensure warfighters and national
security professionals receive the language and culture
training needed to complete their missions effectively, to
include partnerships with K-12 schools and universities.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee
not later than January 1, 2022, on the viability and utility of
establishing a comprehensive plan for the development and
maintenance of advanced foreign language skills and training
for DOD personnel. The briefing shall include consideration of
whether there is a need to establish an Executive Agent for the
program and whether there is a need for investment in
commercially available foreign language training to maintain
access to language training after linguists transition from
education or training environments to operational environments.
Increased capacity for servicemember childcare on military
installations
The committee is aware that servicemembers frequently face
low availability and high costs of childcare, and that this
issue negatively impacts servicemember readiness and military
spouse employment. This childcare issue further forces parents
to make difficult choices and adds stress to military families.
The committee encourages the military services to seek out
creative solutions to solve this childcare availability crisis,
including exploring options to create public-private
partnerships if they would increase capacity and availability
of quality childcare for servicemembers and their dependents.
The committee commends the Navy's efforts to expand capacity in
the Southern California area and encourages the other military
services to consult with the Navy about its approach in
devising creative childcare solutions.
Issuance of prisoner-of-war medal
The committee is concerned about inequities across the
services in applying prisoner-of-war medal eligibility
requirements under section 1128(b) of title 10, United States
Code, as amended by the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239). Specifically, the
Department of the Army has implemented regulatory hurdles that
are difficult for servicemembers and next-of-kin to clear,
whereas the other services have implemented the Act's updates
in a much more direct and streamlined fashion.
Section 584 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2013 authorized the Secretaries concerned to issue
the prisoner-of-war medal to any person who, while serving in
any capacity with the Armed Forces, was held captive under
circumstances in which the Secretary concerned finds were
comparable to those circumstances under which persons have
generally been held captive by enemy armed forces during
periods of armed conflict. The intent of this law was to
broaden eligibility for the prisoner-of-war medal to those who,
for reasons of law and not fact, were not eligible for the
medal because they were not in a conflict or taken prisoner and
held captive by a party whose legal status met the criteria
under subsection (a) of the aforementioned statute. Nothing in
the law required or encouraged the Secretaries concerned to
limit servicemembers' eligibility under subsection (b) to those
members held captive by individuals or groups that were
included on any official or published list of hostile actors.
The law's intent was to give discretion to the Secretaries to
balance the equities and use discretion in appropriate cases.
The committee encourages the services to eschew any policy
that would make the consultation of published lists of bad
actors dispositive in determining whether a member is eligible
for a prisoner-of-war medal.
Not later than March 1, 2022, the Secretaries of the
military departments shall provide a briefing to the Committees
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the process by which they will consider
applications for the prisoner-of-war medal under section
1128(b) of title 10, United States Code.
Management policies for emerging technology qualified officers
Emerging technologies will reshape future warfare. The
military most able to build a cadre of officers who understand
the potential of new technologies will likely be best
positioned for success. The National Security Commission on
Artificial Intelligence (NSCAI) final report stated, ``It is
crucial that the [Department of Defense] incentivize and
increase the skill needed to introduce and field emerging and
disruptive technologies within the military officer corps.''
The NSCAI report recommends creating a management system
modeled on the joint qualification process for officers
qualified in emerging technologies. Officers qualified in
emerging technologies could be useful to their respective
military departments in a number of ways, including: ``1)
Assisting with acquisition of emerging technology; 2) Helping
integrate technology into field units; 3) Developing
organizational and operational concepts; and 4) Developing
training and education plans.''
The committee encourages the Secretaries of the military
departments to review the NSCAI recommendations. Many of the
recommendations may be implemented with new or updated
policies. If a recommendation cannot be implemented using
current authority, the committee encourages the Secretary of
Defense to submit proposals that would amend current law to
enable the Department of Defense to better prepare officers to
understand and take advantage of emerging technologies.
Military Spouse Employment
The committee notes that the well-being and economic
stability of the Nation's military families--and the Nation's
military spouses--is directly linked to the national security
interests of the United States and the long term strength and
viability of the Armed Forces. It is imperative that the Armed
Forces retain and develop their personnel. The committee
remains concerned that the services may be prematurely losing
highly trained personnel as military families are confronted
with the choice of discontinuing a successful business or
gainful employment for a spouse in advance of an overseas
relocation. Other provisions in this Act aim to address these
issues, through a direct hire pilot program within the
Department; however, more avenues of employment must be
explored. As such, the committee urges the Secretary of Defense
to work with the Department of State to address and ameliorate
provisions in future Status of Forces Agreements that restrict
military spouse employment.
The committee recognizes that the COVID-19 pandemic has
changed the manner in which we work, creating greater
opportunities for military spouses globally. The committee
commends the Department for its ongoing efforts to support
military spouse remote work and entrepreneurship, including the
Military Spouse Employment Partnership to better equip military
spouses to navigate the array of regulatory and administrative
challenges they face. Section 560 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91)
authorized the Secretary to create a public-private pilot
program for telework facilities for military spouses on
military installations outside the United States. Pursuant to
that text, this program should conclude not later than December
12, 2021.
Additionally, not later than March 1, 2022, the Secretary
of Defense shall provide the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives a briefing on the
status and, if complete, the outcome of the pilot program
enacted under section 560 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2018.
Notice to servicemembers who separate before completion of service
obligation to transfer GI Bill benefits
The committee has heard concerns that some servicemembers
who have completed substantially all of their service
obligation for transferring GI bill benefits to dependents are
losing eligibility for those benefits because their official
date of separation occurs prior to the completion of their
Active-Duty service obligation. In some cases, the military
departments have approved final separation dates for
servicemembers within weeks or months of satisfying their
obligation, resulting in a devastating loss of benefits for the
servicemember's family.
Accordingly, not later than March 1, 2022, the Under
Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness shall provide
a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate
and the House of Representatives detailing what notice, if any,
the military departments provide to servicemembers whose final
separation dates fall prior to the completion of their GI Bill
transfer service obligation that their benefits will be
affected by their early discharge from service. The briefing
shall also include findings on any deficiencies that exist in
providing such notice and what steps the Department is taking
to address those deficiencies. Finally, the briefing shall
include any efforts the Department is making to ensure that,
when possible, servicemembers are permitted to complete their
service obligation so that they do not lose their benefits,
especially in cases when the final date of separation is within
90 days of completing such service obligation.
Parental rights at service academies
The committee understands that every year the military
service academies experience instances of cadets and midshipmen
who become parents during their period of enrollment. The
unique demands of attending a service academy make it
impossible for cadet or midshipmen parents to care for or
financially support dependents. Therefore, the committee
understands the long-standing policies prohibiting persons with
dependents from enrolling or remaining in our service
academies.
While small in number, these cases present difficult
decisions for cadet and midshipmen parents who deserve the
utmost care by service academy leadership. Academy policies
seem to vary in this area and the committee is concerned about
any policy that would require cadets and midshipmen to choose
between surrendering all parental rights and continuing their
enrollment at a service academy.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness to provide a briefing to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the following issues not later than January
30, 2022:
(1) Current policies for cadets and midshipmen who
have children while enrolled at the various service
academies;
(2) The justification for any policy requiring cadets
and midshipmen to surrender all parental rights before
returning to a service academy after the birth of a
child;
(3) Recommendations for a uniform policy that would
allow cadets and midshipmen who have children while
enrolled at a service academy to return to such service
academy without requiring them to surrender all
parental rights; and
(4) Recommendations for legal or other resources that
may be provided to affected cadets and midshipmen to
provide assistance for decisions related to parental
rights, custody, and benefits that are available to
commissioned officers.
The committee encourages the Department of Defense to
consult with the Department of Homeland Security and the
Department of Transportation in developing its recommendations.
Promotion revision report
The committee notes that the John S. McCain National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-
232) included numerous provisions that provided flexibility to
military officer personnel policy. At the same time, the law
requiring an ``up-or-out'' system for officer promotion was
retained. The committee remains supportive of the long-standing
requirement for most officers to continue promoting through the
ranks in order to be retained on Active Duty. Therefore, the
committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel
and Readiness to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not
later than December 1, 2021, that includes the following items:
(1) Military department policies related to Active
Duty service obligations following a promotion;
(2) Military department selective continuation rates
for officers not selected for promotion to the grades
of O-4 through O-6; and
(3) Military department utilization of constructive
credit, temporary promotion, alternative promotion, and
other recently enacted officer management authorities.
Public schools on military installations program
There are over 160 public schools located within the
boundaries of military installations. Many of these schools
have not had significant facility improvements in years; they
are outdated, operating at or above capacity, and functionally
inadequate. The committee believes that the Department of
Defense and local school districts should prioritize facility
improvements for schools in the Public Schools on Military
Installations (PSMI) program to ensure that military children
are taught in safe, secure environments conducive to learning.
Such schools should also mirror the best local standards
established for other public schools within a particular school
district.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
April 1, 2022, on the PSMI program. The briefing shall include:
(1) An update on progress made by the program to improve school
facilities on military installations; (2) Recommendations on
how to speed up renovation or new construction of school
facilities in the program; (3) An analysis regarding whether
the PSMI list of prioritized construction projects should
undergo a more frequent, regular review; and (4) An assessment
of whether a school on such prioritized list should affect the
overall family support ranking of a military installation.
Public-private talent exchanges
The committee notes that in the William M. (Mac) Thornberry
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public
Law 116-283), the conferees authorized the enhancement of
public-private talent exchange programs in the Department of
Defense (DOD) to ``carry out exchanges of personnel with
private sector entities that are working on the modernization
priorities of the DOD.'' The committee considers artificial
intelligence (AI) to be a modernization priority of the DOD and
therefore directs the Secretary of Defense, when carrying out
the enhancement and expansion of these programs, to seek out
private sector entities on the forefront of AI development.
Restructure of Army Criminal Investigation Command
The Fort Hood Independent Review Committee (FHIRC)
conducted a comprehensive assessment of the Fort Hood command
climate and culture, and its impact on the safety, welfare, and
readiness of soldiers and units. Among other findings, the
FHIRC found that the Fort Hood Criminal Investigation Division
(CID) special agent workforce was unstable, under-experienced,
over-assigned and under-resourced, leading to inefficiencies
that had an adverse impact on investigations, especially in
complex cases involving sex crimes and soldier deaths.
The committee is pleased to learn that the Army has taken
action to address this finding by restructuring the CID with
enhanced capabilities and capacity. The restructured CID will
be led by a civilian member of the Senior Executive Service
with criminal investigative experience and will have a higher
ratio of civilian criminal investigators to military special
agents to increase investigative experience and grow effective
partnerships with local and regional law enforcement agencies.
The committee will carefully monitor the implementation and
effectiveness of this reorganization and its impact on the
quality and timeliness of Army criminal investigations.
Servicemember workforce development
The committee recognizes the importance of supporting
servicemembers as they transition from Active Duty to the
civilian workforce. Servicemembers develop knowledge, skills,
and abilities (KSAs) within their military occupational
specialties (MOSs) that could satisfy the requisite KSAs
associated with civilian occupations. The committee encourages
efforts to improve transitioning servicemembers' prospects for
employment within the civilian workforce by matching
servicemembers' MOSs and potential civilian occupations more
accurately and believes that the U.S. Department of Labor
civilian occupation surveys provide useful means to collect
data that could support those efforts.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in consultation with the Secretaries of Labor and Veterans
Affairs, to assess the feasibility of integrating such surveys
into the Department of Defense's Transition Assistance Program
(TAP). The assessment shall also consider the feasibility of
expanding the scope of those surveys to incorporate the 20 most
populous MOSs in each military department and any additional
data the Secretary deems appropriate. The Secretary shall
provide a briefing on the results of this assessment to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives not later than December 31, 2022.
Temporary promotion utilization
Section 503 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232)
authorized each military department to award temporary
promotions to the grade of O-3 for officers with critical
skills. Based on feedback from organizations within the
Department of Defense, this authority is designed to serve as a
modest incentive to highly qualified junior officers. To date,
none of the military departments have utilized spot promotion
authority to the grade of O-3, despite continuing to struggle
to retain junior officers who possess valuable skill sets. The
committee directs the Director of the Defense Digital Service
(DDS) to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
December 1, 2021, on the potential benefits of utilizing spot
promotion authority for officers selected for an assignment to
the DDS.
Unanimous verdicts for criminal convictions
In Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), the U.S.
Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution requires unanimous verdicts for criminal
convictions in State criminal trials. Article 52 of the Uniform
Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) (10 U.S.C. 852) requires only
concurrence of three-fourths of the members present to convict
an accused of a non-capital offense.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a
legal review of Article 52 of the UCMJ, to determine whether
that Article is constitutional in light of this recent Supreme
Court decision. The committee directs the Secretary to provide
a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate
and House of Representatives, not later than February 1, 2022,
on the results of this legal review and on the feasibility and
advisability of revising the UCMJ to require unanimous verdicts
to be consistent with Federal and State civilian practices,
even if not legally required to do so.
Updates to Fourth Quadrennial Quality of Life review
Under section 118a of title 10, United States Code, the
Secretary of Defense is required to conduct a comprehensive
examination of the quality of life of servicemembers, to result
in determinations and foster policies and actions that reflect
the priority given to the quality of life of servicemembers as
a primary concern of the Department of Defense leadership.
The committee received the Fourth Quadrennial Quality of
Life Review and is disappointed with the lack of thorough
assessment given to the programs of the Department as they
relate to servicemembers and the quality of life of their
families. By statute, the review should identify actions that
are needed in order to provide servicemembers with the quality
of life necessary to encourage the successful execution of the
full range of their missions. As currently constituted, the
Fourth Quadrennial Review does not comprehensively address the
considerations required by section 118a(c) of title 10, United
States Code, nor does it include determinations on policies or
actions to undertake to improve the quality of life for
servicemembers and their families.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review
the statutory requirements in section 118a of title 10, United
States Code, and to update the report to comply with the
comprehensive requirements of Federal law not later than March
1, 2022. Additionally, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to submit any requested changes to section 118a of
title 10, United States Code, to ensure that the Department has
sufficiently detailed statutory guidance to comply with this
quadrennial review requirement.
Upfront use of DNA to identify remains of servicemembers missing in
action
The committee continues its long-standing concern for the
accounting of missing servicemembers from past conflicts and
encourages the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency (DPAA) to
explore new and innovative means to identify servicemembers'
remains. Therefore, the committee directs the DPAA to assess
the feasibility and desirability of the use of DNA samples
under its control for comparison to samples in public or
private DNA databases. Such an assessment shall include a
description of laws, policies, systems, training, personnel,
facilities, infrastructure, information technology, and
stakeholder engagement relevant to potential forensic genetic
genealogical DNA analysis. The committee directs the Director
of the DPAA to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the
results of the assessment not later than January 1, 2022.
TITLE VI--MILITARY COMPENSATION
Basic needs allowance for members on active service in the Armed Forces
(sec. 601)
The committee recommends a provision that would create an
allowance for servicemembers whose gross household income falls
below 130 percent of the Federal poverty guidelines of the
Department of Health and Human Services. This provision is
intended to ensure that all servicemembers can meet the basic
needs of their families, particularly for food expenses.
Equal incentive pay for members of the reserve components of the Armed
Forces (sec. 602)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 37, United States Code, to
require the Secretary concerned to pay equal monthly incentive
pays to eligible members of the reserve components and regular
components.
Extension of expiring travel and transportation authorities (sec. 603)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 12604 of title 10, United States Code, and sections 451
and 452 of title 37, United States Code, to extend certain
travel and transportation authorities that would otherwise
expire at the end of the year. The amendments would extend
authorizations for travel and transportation payments for: (1)
Lodging in kind for reserve component members performing
training; (2) Mandatory pet quarantine fees for household pets;
(3) Travel for certain dependent children to obtain formal
secondary, undergraduate, or vocational education; and (4)
Dependent transportation incident to ship construction,
inactivation, and overhauling.
Repeal of expiring travel and transportation authorities (sec. 604)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal
travel and transportation authorities in subchapter III of
chapter 8 of title 37, United States Code. These authorities
were replaced by subchapter I of chapter 8 of title 37, United
States Code, and are set to expire on December 31, 2021. The
committee recommends that the expiring provisions be repealed
so as to eliminate confusion about the controlling law after
December 31, 2021.
One-year extension of certain expiring bonus and special pay
authorities (sec. 605)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
through December 31, 2022, various expiring bonus and special
pay authorities for military personnel. The provision would
extend special pay and bonus authority for reserve personnel,
military healthcare professionals, and nuclear officers and
consolidated pay authorities for officer and enlisted
personnel. The provision would also extend the authority to
provide temporary increases in the rate of Basic Allowance for
Housing in certain circumstances.
Requirements in connection with suspension of retired pay and
retirement annuities (sec. 606)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) from
suspending military retired pay or a military retirement
annuity until 90 days after the provision of written notice to
a military retiree, annuitant, or their designated
representative of the basis for such proposed suspension, along
with other relevant information.
The provision would also require the Secretary of Defense
to develop, within 180 days of the date of the enactment of
this Act, a single annual eligibility determination procedure
for determinations of continued eligibility for military
retired pay or annuity as a replacement for the current
procedures in connection with the ``Certificate of
Eligibility'' and ``Report of Existence'' for military retirees
and annuitants.
Finally, the provision would require the Secretary of
Defense, in consultation with the Secretaries of Veterans
Affairs and Homeland Security, to provide a report to the
appropriate committees of the Congress not later than one year
after the date of the enactment of this Act on the process by
which notifications of the death of a military retiree or
annuitant may be shared among such Secretaries for the purpose
of determining the termination of eligibility for benefits
administered by such Secretaries.
Items of Special Interest
Basic allowance for housing
A recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report
published January 25, 2021, ``Military Housing: Actions Needed
to Improve the Process for Setting Allowances for
Servicemembers and Calculating Payment for Privatized Housing
Projects'' (GAO 21-137), made several concerning findings. The
Committee is particularly concerned about the finding that the
process for determining basic allowance for housing (BAH) rates
often does not include a sample size with the minimum number of
rental units needed to estimate the total housing cost for
certain locations and housing types. The report found that ``44
percent of locations and housing types had fewer than the
minimum sample-size target.'' This finding reveals a
significant risk of BAH rates not accurately reflecting the
actual cost of housing for servicemembers and their families.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness to provide a briefing to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives not later than December 31, 2021, with a
detailed explanation of the following items:
1) How the Department of Defense can utilize other
Government housing data to better assess the accuracy
of BAH rates;
2) The methodology used to establish appropriate
housing ``anchor points'' for given ranks;
3) How the Department calculates the difference
between the ``with dependent'' and ``without
dependent'' BAH rates in a given housing area;
4) Why the Department of Defense prefers to utilize
the BAH national average to calculate the BAH
reductions authorized in recent legislation;
5) Whether and how the Department will begin using
cost data from recently rented properties to increase
the sample size for BAH rate-setting;
6) Actions under consideration to monitor and reduce
potential bias within local military housing offices as
part of the BAH rate-setting process; and
7) Any other matters the Under Secretary considers
relevant.
Partial dislocation allowance for members ordered to vacate housing
provided by the United States
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
has not updated the Joint Travel Regulation to account for
changes to sections 477(f)(1) and 452(c) of title 37, United
States Code, in the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92). These changes, to both
the ``old law'' and the ``new law'' pertaining to travel and
transportation allowance, expanded eligibility for partial
dislocation allowance to members ordered to vacate barracks and
dormitory-style housing in addition to family housing. Section
477(f)(1) struck the word ``family'' from the ``old law'', and
section 452(c) added an entitlement to the ``new law'' to allow
for such an allowance to be paid to any member ordered to
vacate any housing provided by the United States. In spite of
these changes, the Joint Travel Regulation still limits
eligibility for a partial dislocation allowance to those
members ordered to vacate ``family-type'' housing.
The committee has heard concerns about financial pressures
placed on junior enlisted members being ordered to vacate
barracks and dormitory-style housing. Under the existing law,
they would be eligible for a partial dislocation allowance, but
the Department has not authorized such payments. The committee
encourages the Department to expand eligibility for the partial
dislocation allowance to those members being ordered to vacate
any type of housing provided by the United States, including
barracks and dormitory-style housing, and especially for those
members in the grades E-4 and below with fewer than 3 years of
service.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, not later
than March 1, 2022, to provide a briefing on this issue to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives.
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Tricare and Other Health Care Benefits
Addition of preconception and prenatal carrier screening coverage as
benefits under TRICARE program (sec. 701)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1079(a) of title 10, United States Code, to authorize
coverage of preconception and prenatal carrier screening tests
for certain medical conditions under the TRICARE program. The
provision would authorize an eligible covered beneficiary to
one test per condition per lifetime.
Coverage of overseas subacute and hospice care for eligible overseas
dependents of members of the uniformed services (sec. 702)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 1074j(b) and 1079(a)(15) of title 10, United States
Code, to authorize the Secretary of Defense to provide coverage
of subacute (skilled nursing and home health care services) and
hospice care for eligible overseas dependents of members of the
uniformed services who are on Active Duty for a period of more
than 30 days.
Modification of pilot program on receipt of non-generic prescription
maintenance medications under TRICARE pharmacy benefits program
(sec. 703)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 706 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) to
require the Secretary of Defense to conduct a 3-year pilot
program under which covered TRICARE beneficiaries could elect
to receive certain non-generic prescription maintenance
medications either through military treatment facility
pharmacies, the TRICARE mail order pharmacy program, or retail
network pharmacies, if the Secretary determines that the total
cost to the Department of Defense would not exceed the total
cost for providing these prescriptions through the TRICARE mail
order pharmacy program. The provision would also provide that
reimbursement of retail pharmacies for prescriptions provided
under the pilot program may not exceed the amount of
reimbursement that would have been paid for prescriptions
dispensed through the TRICARE mail order pharmacy program.
Subtitle B--Health Care Administration
Revisions to TRICARE provider networks (sec. 721)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 1075 and 1097a of title 10, United States Code, to
authorize multiple provider networks in the same geographical
area under TRICARE Select and TRICARE Prime.
Implementation of an integrated TRICARE program through effective
market management (sec. 722)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Director of the
Defense Health Agency, to implement integration of the direct
care and purchased care components of the TRICARE program
through effective management of geographic markets. The
provision would prescribe the elements of market integration
that would include a responsibility to ensure: (1) The medical
readiness of the Armed Forces; and (2) Provision of health care
services in military medical treatment facilities to maintain
the critical wartime medical readiness skills and core
competencies of health care providers in the Armed Forces. In
addition, the provision would require a streamlined, effective
patient referral system for TRICARE beneficiaries and a
continued enrollment operation for such beneficiaries in
geographic markets.
Establishment of centers of excellence for enhanced treatment of ocular
injuries (sec. 723)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Director of the
Defense Health Agency (DHA), to establish, not later than
October 1, 2022, at least four regional centers of excellence
(COEs) for the enhanced treatment of ocular wounds or injuries
and vision dysfunction related to ocular wounds or injuries and
traumatic brain injury. Each COE would be located at a military
medical center that provides graduate medical education in
ophthalmology and its related subspecialties. Regional COEs
would be the primary referral centers for providing specialized
medical services for vision of servicemembers located in each
center's region.
The provision would also require the DHA to publish
policies on a publicly available internet web site for the
referral of eligible beneficiaries of the Department of Defense
to such centers. To address staffing of the COEs, the provision
would require the Secretaries of the military departments, in
conjunction with the Joint Staff Surgeon and the DHA Director,
to identify specific medical personnel billets essential for
the evaluation and treatment of ocular sensory injuries and to
ensure that the COEs are staffed to provide the enduring
medical support of each center.
Finally, the provision would require the Secretary of
Defense to submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
December 31, 2022, that: (1) Describes the establishment of
each COE and the referral policy published by the DHA; (2)
Identifies the medical personnel billets required to staff the
COEs; and (3) Provides a plan for staffing the COEs.
Mandatory training on health effects of burn pits (sec. 724)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to train Department of Defense medical
providers on the potential health effects of burn pits.
Removal of requirement for one year of participation in certain medical
and lifestyle incentive programs of the Department of Defense
to receive benefits under such programs (sec. 725)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 729 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to remove the requirement
for 1 year of participation in certain medical and lifestyle
incentive programs before an eligible beneficiary could receive
benefits under such programs. This provision would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to offer incentives earlier to
encourage beneficiaries to change their behaviors to improve
their health.
Authority of Secretary of Defense and Secretary of Veterans Affairs to
enter into agreements for planning, design, and construction of
facilities to be operated as shared medical facilities (sec.
726)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs
to enter into agreements to plan, design, and construct
facilities to be operated as shared medical facilities. The
provision would prescribe how funds could be transferred and
merged between the Department of Defense and the Department of
Veterans Affairs.
Consistency in accounting for medical reimbursements received by
military medical treatment facilities from other Federal
agencies (sec. 727)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1085 of title 10, United States Code, to provide
consistency in accounting for medical reimbursements received
by the Department of Defense for inpatient and outpatient
medical or dental care provided to beneficiaries of another
Federal agency and for reimbursements from third-party
insurance companies.
Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters
Access by United States Government employees and their family members
to certain facilities of Department of Defense for assessment
and treatment of anomalous health conditions (sec. 741)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to provide certain U.S. Government
employees and their family members who are experiencing
symptoms of anomalous health conditions, as defined by the
Secretary for the purposes of this provision, timely access for
medical assessment, subject to space availability, to the
National Intrepid Center of Excellence, an Intrepid Spirit
Center, or an appropriate military medical treatment facility.
The provision would also require the Secretary to furnish
treatment to any such individual diagnosed with an anomalous
health condition or related affliction, subject to space
availability, at the National Intrepid Center of Excellence, an
Intrepid Spirit Center, or an appropriate military medical
treatment facility.
The provision would further require the Secretary, in
consultation with the heads of appropriate Federal agencies, to
develop a process by which employees of those agencies and
their family members are afforded timely access to the National
Intrepid Center of Excellence, an Intrepid Spirit Center, or an
appropriate military medical treatment facility, pursuant to
subsection (a) by not later than 60 days after the date of
enactment of this Act.
Finally, the provision would require the Secretary of
Defense to include certain demographic data on these anomalous
health conditions in the Department of Defense Trauma Registry,
subject to agreement by the employing agency and the consent of
the employee.
Extension of authority for Joint Department of Defense-Department of
Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund (sec. 742)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1704(e) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84), as amended by section 732
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116-92), to extend the authority for the Joint
Department of Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs
Demonstration Fund from September 30, 2021, to September 30,
2023.
Comptroller General study on implementation by Department of Defense of
recent statutory requirements to reform the military health
system (sec. 743)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a study on
the Department of Defense's implementation of statutory
requirements to reform the military health system. The
provision would prescribe the elements of such study and
require the Comptroller General to brief the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
on the status of the study not later than May 1, 2022. The
Comptroller General would then submit a report on the study to
the same committees not later than May 1, 2023.
Budget Items
Anomalous health incidents
The budget request included $35.6 billion in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for the Defense Health
Program, of which $9.7 billion was for line number 1 In-House
Care.
The committee recommends an increase in OMDW of $30.0
million for line number 1 In-House Care to address the threat
characterization and treatment of certain uniformed members,
Federal civilian employees, and their family members affected
by anomalous health incidents. The provision underlying this
change in funding levels is discussed in greater detail in
title VII of this committee report.
Items of Special Interest
Access to mental health care
The challenges associated with military life, including
frequent deployments, repeated moves, and spouse unemployment,
put servicemembers and their families at increased risk of
mental and behavioral health concerns. It is essential that the
military health system (MHS) ensures that servicemembers and
their families have access to timely, high quality mental
health care.
However, an August 2020 report by the Department of Defense
Inspector General (DOD IG), titled ``Evaluation of Access to
Mental Health Care in the Department of Defense'' (DODIG-2020-
112), revealed significant barriers to accessing mental health
care. The DOD IG concluded that thousands of Active-Duty
servicemembers and their families may have experienced delays
in obtaining mental health care. These delays may have involved
numerous beneficiaries not being able to see the right provider
at the right time, obtain mental health care at all, or receive
timely follow-up treatment. All of these types of delays in
mental health care increase the risk of jeopardizing patient
safety and affecting the readiness of the force. The DOD IG
also found that more than 5 percent of those referred for
mental health treatment in the purchased care system never
received the prescribed care.
The committee is concerned by these findings and directs
the Secretary of Defense to brief the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives not later
than February 1, 2022, on actions taken to address these
shortfalls. The committee expects the DOD to develop a plan to
ensure that when beneficiaries are referred for mental health
care they receive direct assistance in identifying appropriate
mental health providers within the direct care system or
TRICARE network, confirming the availability of the service
with a particular provider within access to care standards, and
securing the initial appointment for the beneficiary.
Battlefield analgesia
In a battlefield environment, wounded servicemembers may
receive either inadequate or no pain treatment following severe
traumatic injury. Studies of U.S. and international Armed
Forces report that only 19 percent to 39 percent of combat
casualties receive adequate pain treatment at the point of
injury. Typically, combat medics accomplish pain management on
a far-forward battlefield by administering opioid analgesics,
but opioids can lead to respiratory depression, further
complicating treatment, and in certain cases, hasten a
servicemember's death.
In the United States, medical professionals in emergency
medicine departments commonly use ketamine, a general
anesthetic agent, in analgesic (low) doses as an alternative to
opioid medications because ketamine has no deleterious
hemodynamic or respiratory effects. In fact, the Department of
Defense's Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care recommends
intravenous (IV) or intraosseous (IO) ketamine to treat
moderate to severe pain in wounded patients experiencing
hemorrhagic shock and/or respiratory depression. Unfortunately,
IV and IO modes of ketamine administration may be impractical
in a highly contested combat environment, and thus, effective
pain management may be delayed until the patient has been
transported to a field hospital.
The committee is aware that the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) has approved intranasal ketamine for
certain medical conditions. The committee believes that
intranasal ketamine could be easily administered in a far-
forward combat environment and could result in better pain
management as the patient moves from the battlefield to a field
hospital. Therefore, the committee recommends that the
Department of Defense conduct the necessary pre-clinical
testing and clinical trials of intranasal ketamine such that
the results may be used to facilitate FDA approval of
intranasal ketamine for acute pain management.
Body composition standards
Currently, military body composition standards are based on
archaic, homogeneous data and standards that can be
discriminatory. These standards appear to be based on the goal
of ensuring a ``military appearance.'' Attempts to comply with
body composition standards frequently contribute to unhealthy
eating disorders that can be hazardous in career fields where
focus and attention to detail can be impacted by the disorder.
The committee commends the Army Research Institute of
Environmental Medicine and the Marine Corps' Human Performance
Branch on partnering to conduct the most technologically
advanced study of body composition standards since the 1980s.
Participants in this study will receive high-tech body scans
and special X-rays that may lead to military-wide updates to
body composition standards, which have long been criticized as
outdated. The committee expects this study to lead to
enlightened body composition standards for all servicemembers.
Briefing on impact of TRICARE copays on utilization of certain
healthcare services
The committee is concerned about the potential impact of
TRICARE copay increases on utilization of healthcare services
for mental health care, physical therapy, speech therapy, and
occupational therapy by some TRICARE beneficiaries. These
services often require multiple therapy sessions to address an
underlying medical condition, and higher copays may dissuade
some beneficiaries from seeking care.
As a result, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to conduct an analysis of the impact of TRICARE copay increases
on utilization of outpatient mental health and on physical,
speech, and occupational therapy visits by TRICARE Group A
beneficiaries. The analysis shall compare utilization rates of
these services in 2016 and 2017 to utilization rates of these
services in 2018 and 2019. Utilization may be measured by
variables such as unique users, average number of visits per
user, distribution of users across the number of visits (one
visit only, 2-3 visits, 4-6 visits, 7-9 visits, 10-12 visits,
and more than 12 visits) or other measures the Secretary deems
appropriate. For TRICARE Prime beneficiaries where the data are
available, the analysis shall assess the percent of patients
referred for these services who actually accessed care. The
analysis shall cross-tabulate data for each beneficiary sponsor
category and TRICARE Plan (Prime vs. Select) given that copays
vary across these groups. The Secretary shall submit a briefing
of such analysis, not later than February 1, 2022, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives.
Comprehensive brain health and treatment for special operations forces
The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to
support academic medical centers carrying out comprehensive
brain health and treatment programs. These programs provide
coordinated, integrated, evidenced-based and/or evidence-
informed care, multidisciplinary specialist evaluations,
treatment initiation, nursing case management, and aftercare
coordination to members of Special Operations Forces and other
servicemembers impacted by traumatic brain injury and other
associated health factors that influence long-term brain health
and performance.
Comptroller General assessment of Department of Defense health care
provider adverse privileging actions
Not later than December 1, 2022, the Comptroller General of
the United States shall complete an assessment and provide a
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives on the Department of Defense's
implementation and oversight of clinical quality management
procedures, including: (1) Procedures for taking adverse
privileging action against health care providers on the basis
of quality and safety concerns; and (2) Procedures for
reporting such actions to the National Practitioner Data Bank,
State licensing boards, and other regulatory agencies.
Continued collaboration between the Department of Defense and Israeli
institutions on medical research
The conference report (H. Rept. 116-617) accompanying the
William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) directed the
Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
on military health research collaboration between the United
States and Israel on technical areas such as military trauma,
infectious disease surveillance, and diagnostics and treatment
for traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress disorder.
The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs provided
a briefing to such committees in April 2021. The briefing
highlighted multiple collaborative research efforts in each of
the technical areas by the Department of Defense (DOD) and
Israel. Since 2016, the DOD and Israeli research institutions
have completed 12 research projects, and 10 projects are
ongoing. Additionally, the DOD and Israel have broad-scope
intergovernmental agreements in place that foster continued
collaboration, support access to Israeli medical research
advances, and provide for contracts and grants to engage
Israeli institutions in the DOD's medical research efforts. The
committee encourages the DOD to continue its successful
collaboration with Israeli institutions to make further
advances in military medical research.
Continued study and research on post-traumatic stress disorder and
traumatic brain injury
The committee notes the significant effect that post-
traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and traumatic brain injury
(TBI) have had on servicemembers. The committee has been
encouraged by the valuable research conducted through
Department of Defense-sponsored consortia that has enhanced
understanding of the causes, treatments, and recovery protocols
for PTSD and TBI. As these medical conditions are the signature
injuries of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts, they will
likely have an enduring impact on military personnel in the
future. Therefore, the committee encourages the Secretary of
Defense to continue robust study and research into the causes
of, and the treatments for, PTSD and TBI.
Continuity of care in TRICARE's Extended Care Health Program
The committee remains concerned that certain military
family members registered in the Department of Defense's
Extended Care Health Option (ECHO) under its Exceptional Family
Member Program (EFMP) are unable to receive timely medical
specialty care referrals when they move to a new permanent
change of station (PCS) location. Therefore, the committee
directs the Director of the Defense Health Agency to provide a
briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives, not later than March 1, 2022,
that:
(1) Assesses the feasibility of continuing certain
ECHO services initiated at the previous duty station
for up to 6 months without authorization and referral
after servicemembers execute a PCS;
(2) Assesses the degree to which the Department
prioritizes or fast-tracks specialty care referrals
after a PCS to ensure continuity of care;
(3) Assesses the feasibility of using virtual health
services as a method by which ECHO case managers can
better provide continuity of care services to military
families;
(4) Describes the average wait-time for an ECHO
family to receive a medical specialty care referral
after a PCS move; and
(5) Describes any barriers that may exist that delay
an EFMP enrollee from receiving timely medical
specialty care.
Development of oral, ultra-long-acting, sustained-release hypertension
and diabetes therapeutics
The committee is concerned about the increase of type II
diabetes and hypertension in Active-Duty, Reserve, and National
Guard personnel that may impact unit readiness. Advances in the
development of oral, ultra-long-acting drug delivery methods
have potential for significant health improvement, increased
readiness, and cost savings for the Department of Defense
(DOD). The committee supports accelerated development of
sustained-release oral medications for the treatment of type II
diabetes and hypertension and encourages DOD to include oral,
ultra-long-acting, sustained-release drug platforms as a
priority focus area in its medical research portfolio.
Dietary supplement adverse event reporting
The committee commends the Department of Defense (DOD) for
its efforts to educate servicemembers on safe dietary
supplement use through the Operation Supplement Safety Program.
The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) adverse events
reporting data show that certain dietary supplements are more
likely to cause severe medical problems than vitamins or
minerals. The committee acknowledges the FDA's existing adverse
event reporting system and recognizes the military health
system's need to track adverse events data. Therefore, the
committee recommends that the DOD include adverse event
reporting for dietary supplements within military electronic
health records and share these data with the FDA's adverse
events tracking system.
Domestic active pharmaceutical ingredient manufacturing report
The committee remains concerned about the Department of
Defense's (DOD's) reliance on foreign nations, especially
adversarial nations like China, for active pharmaceutical
ingredients and finished pharmaceutical products. To ensure
resiliency in the DOD's medical products supply chain, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in consultation
with other appropriate Federal officials, to submit a report to
the congressional defense committees, not later than March 1,
2022, on the feasibility of establishing a pilot project to
increase the capacity of the United States to manufacture
active pharmaceutical ingredients and finished pharmaceutical
products identified in such assessment as required to enable
combat readiness and protect the health of the Armed Forces.
The report shall include an assessment of:
(1) The drugs and active pharmaceutical ingredients,
including oral solid dose medicines, that such a pilot
program should prioritize for manufacture, based on the
importance of the drugs for combat readiness and their
existing domestic and international manufacturing
capacity;
(2) The existing domestic manufacturing capacity,
specifically current active contracts procuring
medications, for the drugs and active pharmaceutical
ingredients identified in subparagraph (1);
(3) The existing international manufacturing capacity
in the potential partners identified in section
713(b)(E) of subtitle B of title VII of the William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act
(Public Law 116-283) for the drugs and active
pharmaceutical ingredients identified in (1);
(4) The financial resources necessary for the pilot
program to ensure an uninterrupted supply from domestic
manufacturers of the drugs and active pharmaceutical
ingredients identified in (1) for use by the Department
of Defense; and
(5) The length of time necessary for such a pilot
program.
Electronic health record interoperability between the Departments of
Defense and Veterans Affairs
A Government Accountability Office (GAO) report released on
February 11, 2021, titled ``Electronic Health Records: VA Has
Made Progress in Preparing for New System, but Subsequent Test
Findings Will Need to Be Addressed'' (GAO-21-224), described
implementation challenges faced by the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) prior to its initial electronic health record
(EHR) deployment. Those challenges are similar to ones
experienced by the Department of Defense (DOD) as it deployed
its EHR--problems with system configuration and workflows,
capability development and documentation, system interfaces,
end user training, and resolution of critical and high severity
test findings. In its report, the GAO recommended the VA
postpone new EHR deployments until it resolved its problems.
Continued deployment of the VA's EHR without fully resolving
known problems could lead to deployment of a system that fails
to perform as intended, negatively impacting patient care and
hurting user adoption. Additionally, if problems remain, the
committee is concerned that there will be greater risk to
seamless interoperability between DOD and VA EHRs in the
future.
The DOD's operational testing of its fielded electronic
health record system, MHS Genesis, helped to identify and
address similar problems. The Department's Office of Testing
and Evaluation (DOT&E) has more than 3 years of experience
operationally testing MHS Genesis at military treatment
facilities that are using the same EHR platform as the VA.
During this period, DOD's operational testers learned many
important lessons about testing EHR systems in an operational
environment. The committee believes that the VA should tap this
vast source of knowledge and extensive experience within DOD so
that the VA can address known and unknown EHR problems quickly.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to offer an operational test and evaluation of the VA's EHR
modernization program to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, not
later than 60 days following deployment to the VA's first
medium or large hospital. If the Secretary of Veterans Affairs
accepts that test and evaluation offer, and after performing
such test and evaluation, the DOT&E shall provide a report, not
later than 180 days following such deployment, to the
Secretaries with copies of the report provided to the
Committees on Armed Services and Veterans' Affairs of the
Senate and the House of Representatives.
Elimination of low-value healthcare
The American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation created
the Choosing Wisely initiative to ``promote conversations
between clinicians and patients'' that would help patients
select the best course of medical treatment for themselves--
treatment free from harm, necessary, evidence-based, and not
duplicative. According to the Choosing Wisely web site,
numerous medical specialty societies have published more than
550 recommendations of overused tests and treatments, including
five recommendations from the American Dental Association, that
clinicians and patients should discuss. These discussions
between physicians or dentists and their patients will often
lead to lower healthcare costs by limiting the number of
unnecessary, low-value healthcare services delivered to
patients.
While the Defense Health Agency (DHA) has taken certain
small steps to eliminate the delivery of low-value healthcare
services in the military health system (MHS), it has not
conducted a comprehensive analysis of those services provided
by its direct and purchased care components. A thorough
analysis by the DHA would help the MHS better understand how to
use Choosing Wisely initiatives more fully and effectively.
Without such analysis, the committee believes that the
Department of Defense (DOD) may be wasting healthcare dollars
on low-value services that often yield little results for
patients. The committee understands that Humana Military,
TRICARE's East Region managed care support contractor,
estimates that incorporation of the top five Choosing Wisely
initiatives into its region could save the DOD approximately
$13.0 million annually. Therefore, the committee directs the
DHA to leverage best practices from commercial health plans to
eliminate low-value services from the MHS by incorporating
Choosing Wisely initiatives into its TRICARE managed care
support contracts and the TRICARE Dental Program.
Improvements to healthcare for Active-Duty women
In November 2020, the Defense Health Board (DHB), a Federal
Advisory Committee to the Secretary of Defense, published a
report on Active-Duty women's (ADW) healthcare services. In the
report, the DHB provided its findings and submitted
recommendations to improve access to care, the quality of care,
and the medical readiness of women servicemembers. In
preparation for publishing the report, a DHB subcommittee
conducted a review of the current women's health services
provided in the military health system, evaluated the
Department of Defense's and foreign militaries' policies and
practices on women's healthcare, and studied relevant peer-
reviewed scientific literature. Disturbingly, the DHB found
that ``decades of findings and recommendations concerning ADW's
health have not led to sustained improvements.'' Of note, the
DHB highlighted that ``DOD's traditional male norms and
attitudes contribute to the variability in the knowledge of
ADW's health needs'' and determined that women's health
improvements ``should be implemented proactively using a life
cycle perspective, rather than reacting to isolated episodes or
incidents.'' Additionally, the report recognized that women's
healthcare improves when women are ``empowered to perform self-
care and be equal partners in their care.''
The committee recognizes the far-reaching importance of
this report and believes that the Office of the Secretary of
Defense and the military departments must firmly commit to
prioritize women's health by introducing health information
technology solutions that specifically serve the needs of women
in garrison and while deployed. Furthermore, the Department
must: (1) Standardize the scope of healthcare services given to
ADW throughout their careers; (2) Provide options for self-
treatment of common medical conditions unique to women,
especially in a deployed or field environment; (3) Apply
uniform post-partum fitness-for-duty standards across the
services; (4) Develop an outcomes-based dashboard that gives
specific data on the medical readiness of ADW; and (5) Provide
customized equipment to ADW to minimize injuries during
training or during deployments.
Finally, the committee believes that the Department must
place greater emphasis on advancing evidence-based healthcare
services for ADW by standardizing the delivery of such services
in its medical treatment facilities and in the TRICARE provider
network. The committee deems the Defense Health Agency (DHA)
uniquely qualified, under its enhanced execution authority, to
lead this effort. Therefore, the committee encourages the DHA
to implement the DHB recommendation to establish an office
``with a clear charter to approve recommendations necessary to
improve ADW's health, fitness, safety, and performance'' during
each phase of their careers.
Integrated training for Army first responders and medical professionals
The committee applauds the Department of Defense's (DOD)
support to the U.S. national pandemic response and recognizes
that DOD may be required to provide future support to a whole-
of-government response to mass casualty events caused by
chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear (CBRN) weapons.
The Army's CBRN first responders and medical professionals,
including physicians, nurses, physician assistants, and combat
medics, will play a key role in any DOD response to such
events. The committee is aware, however, that these first
responders and medical professionals do not currently train
together in an institutional setting to respond together during
CBRN events. This training gap may limit the ability to deliver
a prompt and well-coordinated operational medical response to
CBRN mass casualty events. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of the Army to provide a briefing to the Committees
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives not later than April 1, 2022, that describes
the Army's plans to establish integrated training for the
Army's CBRN first responders and its medical professionals.
Integration of biometric synthetic training technologies to support
better health outcomes
The committee is aware that the U.S. Army Health Center at
Vicenza, Italy, has demonstrated promising results from the use
of a small arms human performance-based synthetic training
system to assist in the diagnosis, assessment, and
rehabilitation of military personnel recovering from mild
traumatic brain injury (mTBI) and post-traumatic stress
disorder (PTSD). This system allows medical personnel to
collect and analyze hundreds of biometric and human performance
data points, establishing detailed cognitive and physical
baselines to track patient rehabilitation progress more
effectively. Therefore, the committee encourages the Department
of Defense to conduct a pilot program to explore how human
performance synthetic training systems can be further used to
establish and monitor cognitive and physical baselines for
servicemembers throughout their careers to aid in the
assessment and diagnosis of mTBI and PTSD.
Market price generics program
The committee has received reports of disruptions in
pharmacy access for some beneficiaries due to inadequate
supplies of medications provided by the Defense Logistics
Agency (DLA) to the TRICARE Mail Order Pharmacy. When DLA is
unable to provide the medications required to serve
beneficiaries, mail order pharmacy beneficiaries are referred
to the TRICARE retail pharmacy program, leading to potentially
higher costs for the beneficiary and the Government. To address
this problem, the Defense Health Agency (DHA) established the
Market Price Generics Program (MPGP) that authorizes DHA to
rely on alternate sources of supply to serve the pharmaceutical
needs of its beneficiaries.
The committee commends DHA's efforts to address this
problem. However, the committee is concerned that the program
is underutilized due to the MPGP's processes that result in
delays to beneficiaries' access to prescribed drugs. Therefore,
the committee encourages DHA to streamline MPGP processes,
continue expansion of MPGP utilization, and use additional
tools to ensure beneficiaries have access to prescribed
medications when using the TRICARE Mail Order Pharmacy.
Medical necessity and prior authorization process for non-covered drugs
in the TRICARE program
Section 702 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) authorized the Secretary
of Defense to exclude from the TRICARE pharmacy program any
pharmaceutical agent that the Secretary determines provides
very little or no clinical effectiveness over other covered
drugs. These drugs are known as Tier 4 (non-covered), and the
Secretary may exclude their coverage when alternative
medications are available on the TRICARE drug formulary.
There is no specific process, however, for TRICARE
beneficiaries to request medical necessity coverage and prior
authorization of a Tier 4 drug when other formulary medications
are ineffective or less effective. Beneficiaries must,
therefore, file a formal reconsideration request with the
TRICARE mail order pharmacy contractor, and the contractor has
up to 60 days to issue a determination. Upon denial of such
request by the contractor, a beneficiary may file a formal
review request, in writing, to the Defense Health Agency (DHA).
The DHA may then take up to 90 days to issue a formal review
determination. Throughout this lengthy process, beneficiaries
may be without medications that more effectively manage their
specific medical conditions. Therefore, the committee directs
the Director of the Defense Health Agency to establish a
medical necessity and prior authorization process whereby a
beneficiary may request coverage of a Tier 4 drug at the same
co-pay or cost-share as a Tier 3 non-formulary drug, and to
brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the
House of Representatives on this appeal process not later than
February 1, 2022.
Mobile application to enable periodic health assessments for National
Guard members
The committee encourages the Chief of the National Guard
Bureau to implement a mobile application, fully compliant with
Department of Defense information security protocols that would
enable National Guard members to complete certain portions of
the annual Periodic Health Assessment on a smartphone, tablet
computer, or other handheld mobile device. The committee
recommends that the application incorporate a flexible
interface that allows users to adopt it with minimal effort and
resources. Additionally, the committee believes that such
application should incorporate standardized approaches to
handle data definition and mapping, cybersecurity, device
protocols, data format, and quality assurance testing and
support.
Musculoskeletal injury prevention
The committee recognizes that preventable musculoskeletal
injuries negatively impact servicemembers' health and military
readiness. Musculoskeletal injuries account for almost 25
percent of all military injuries, and investing in injury
prevention education and human performance programming can
greatly reduce the number of injuries. Therefore, the committee
encourages the Secretary of Defense to expand current programs
addressing musculoskeletal injury prevention and to include
research that will identify risk factors for musculoskeletal
injuries among members of the Armed Forces. Additionally, the
committee supports partnerships between the Department of
Defense and institutions of higher education with existing
injury prevention and human performance education programs to
support data collection and research regarding musculoskeletal
injuries to improve servicemembers' health and force readiness.
National Disaster Medical System Pilot Program
The committee continues to support the National Disaster
Medical System Pilot Program authorized in section 740 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public
Law 116-92), as amended by section 741 of the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (Public Law 116-283).
The committee notes the Department of Defense's decision to
select Washington D.C.; San Antonio, TX; Sacramento, CA; Omaha,
NE; and Denver, CO as pilot program sites, and the Department's
plan to commence the pilot after September 30, 2021. The
committee expects to be informed periodically on the progress
of the program throughout its duration.
National public health emergency and disaster medical network model
The committee commends the U.S. Army's Telemedicine and
Advanced Technology Research Center (TATRC) for the rapid
development and deployment of the National Emergency Tele-
Critical Care Network (NETCCN). In response to the COVID-19
pandemic, TATRC quickly established a cloud-based, low-
resource, stand-alone telehealth information management system
capable of providing flexible, mobile, and scalable virtual
critical care capabilities to healthcare facilities, field
hospitals, and other locations lacking the critical care
expertise and resources necessary to provide health care to
critically ill patients. The committee recognizes the NETCCN's
competitive innovative approach and its derived technology
platform as a model for future clinically guided telemedicine
technology procurements. Therefore, the committee encourages
the Defense Health Agency to fully leverage this Federal
investment by adopting relevant modules of this highly
configurable technology portfolio to accelerate current and
future digital health and telehealth applications throughout
the military health system.
Non-helmet preventative devices for traumatic brain injury
Although the Department of Defense (DOD) has spent
approximately $1.8 billion over the last 10 years on research
and development related to traumatic brain injury (TBI), a
recent assessment by the Congressional Research Service found
that DOD has pursued only a few projects focused on non-helmet
TBI preventative devices. The committee is concerned that DOD's
research and development efforts have not included a study of
these devices that could help prevent TBI. The committee
believes that evaluation of such devices should be a key
component of the Department's holistic effort to prevent TBI in
training and combat environments. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing on TBI
prevention to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate
and the House of Representatives not later than January 31,
2022. This briefing shall include, at a minimum: (1) An
analysis of the number and types of traumatic brain injuries
experienced by servicemembers over the previous 10 years; (2)
An assessment of types of commercially available non-helmet
preventive devices cleared by the Food and Drug Administration;
and (3) A plan to study the effectiveness of such devices to
prevent TBIs in training and combat environments.
Plasma-derived antibody products
The committee recognizes the importance of plasma-derived
antibody therapies for the temporary protection from infectious
diseases affecting warfighters at home and abroad. Plasma-
derived antibody therapies allow for military personnel to
obtain naturally-occurring antibodies until more specific
therapeutics, vaccines, or other medical countermeasures are
available. The committee understands the threat that emerging
infectious diseases, such as coronavirus, pose to our national
security, and thus, encourages the Department of Defense to
study the use of Food and Drug Administration-approved pooled
plasma-derived antibody products developed in the United States
to prevent or treat disease caused by new or emerging disease
pathogens.
Point-of-care ultrasound system in the tactical combat casualty care
environment
The committee notes that timely diagnostic imaging that
supports sound clinical decisions can improve battlefield
injury survival. By using whole-body single transducer
ultrasound systems, advanced diagnostic imaging capabilities
can now be available to medical personnel from the moment of
battlefield injury through casualty evacuation and subsequent
transport to a tertiary care center. Equipped with machine
learning tools and a simple user interface on a mobile device,
such relatively inexpensive systems incorporate secure image
storage and can facilitate reach-back consultation from combat
casualty locations directly to trauma specialists. Therefore,
the committee encourages the Department of Defense to implement
a point-of-care ultrasound system in the tactical combat
casualty care environment.
Pooled testing to promote bio-surveillance of disease outbreaks
The committee recognizes that COVID-19 outbreaks have had a
dramatic effect on the medical readiness of the Armed Forces.
Regular, population-level bio-surveillance through pooled or
aggregate testing in the military could help thwart disease
outbreaks that may harm national security. Implementing this
testing capability now, during the COVID-19 pandemic, could
establish a viable bio-surveillance capability for the military
in the future. Therefore, the committee encourages the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a 6-month pilot program to
expand pooled COVID-19 testing of asymptomatic servicemembers
at recruit training depots using commercial-off-the-shelf test
kits that could serve as a proof-of-concept for broader
implementation throughout the Department of Defense.
Prevention of hemorrhagic death with next generation freeze-dried
platelets
Uncontrolled bleeding is the major cause of preventable
death on the battlefield for military forces. The Department of
Defense estimates that 976 deaths (or 90 percent of preventable
deaths) caused by hemorrhage from 2001 to 2011 in Afghanistan
and Iraq were potentially survivable if bleeding could have
been stopped. The committee understands the future battlefield
will require prolonged field care and that next generation
lyophilized blood products for hemorrhage control must be
immediately available at all levels of care. Furthermore,
austere environments have changed battlefield medical logistics
and may require ruggedized packaging of freeze-dried plasma and
platelets with greater capabilities than currently deployed
systems. Therefore, the committee encourages the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs and the Defense Health
Agency to fund clinical trials of freeze-dried hemostatic
products, especially platelet-derived products, and the
development of unique packaging for use by deployed forces.
Review of maternal deaths at military treatment facilities
The committee commends the Department of Defense for its
efforts to address maternal mortality and severe morbidity
among servicemembers.
The committee recognizes that continued efforts to improve
the standardization of data and review processes related to
U.S. maternal mortality are a necessary step in an effort to
eliminate disparities and preventable maternal deaths.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
February 1, 2022, on the Department's efforts to review
maternal deaths at military treatment facilities, as well as
details on the Department's efforts to implement
recommendations presented in the Department's June 10, 2019,
report to the Congress titled ``Maternal and Infant Mortality
Rates in the Military Health System.'' The committee also
directs the Department to include in the report information on:
(1) The extent to which reviews of each death are conducted by
a multidisciplinary group of experts; (2) The extent to which
the Department seeks input from physicians, epidemiologists,
patient advocates, civilians with experience with reviews of
maternal mortality records, and other experts; (3) Measures
taken to ensure data collection is transparent, consistent, and
comprehensive; (4) Measures to ensure confidentiality
protections and de-identification of any information specific
to a maternal mortality case or severe maternal morbidity case;
(5) Efforts to facilitate data and records sharing with State
maternal mortality review committees; and (6) The Department's
process for accessing National Death Index data and State death
certificate data at the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. The report shall also include information on the
Department's meaningful participation in quality improvement
programs, including the Alliance for Innovation on Maternal
Health program, a perinatal quality collaborative, or similar
maternal health quality improvement initiatives.
Selected Reserve separation history and physical examinations
The committee understands that the Departments of Defense
and Veterans Affairs (VA) are working to develop a single,
comprehensive separation history and physical examination
(SHPE), which will include a mental health examination for
servicemembers leaving Active-Duty service. The committee
encourages the Departments to extend the SHPE to members of the
National Guard and Reserves who otherwise qualify as veterans
eligible for benefits from the VA, including members of the
Selected Reserve who have not supported a contingency operation
for a period of more than 30 days.
Not later than January 31, 2022, the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, shall
review a statistically significant sample of records of former
members of the Selected Reserve and submit to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a
briefing addressing the following: (1) The total number of
individuals qualified for VA benefits who separated from the
Selected Reserve during the 1-year period preceding the
submittal of the report; (2) The number of such individuals who
received a SHPE at a military medical treatment facility; and
(3) The number of such individuals who applied for VA benefits,
enrolled in the VA health system, or received other VA
benefits.
Synchronized procurement of combat medical kits
Reducing the number of preventable deaths on the
battlefield is a top priority for the committee. Individual
first aid kits (IFAKs) and combat life saver kits (CLSKs)
contain products designed to improve lifesaving performance by
every servicemember. These products target the leading causes
of preventable combat deaths--massive hemorrhage, airway
obstruction, respiration, circulation, head wounds, and
hypothermia--and simplify tactical medicine from the point-of-
injury through evacuation from the battlefield.
The current logistics systems used to procure such
products, however, are not synchronized. For example,
procurement of IFAKs/CLSKs for one combat brigade requires
extensive management of approximately 180,000 single items,
from depots down to the individual soldier level, and each
product has its own expiration date and manufacturer lot
number. Additionally, the current patchwork procurement
process, involving nearly a dozen different supply chains, may
often be performed by facilities not registered by the Food and
Drug Administration and not ISO: 13485 compliant. This
inefficient process can lead to extensive delays in product
delivery that can result in medical products, particularly
sterilized products, with shortened shelf lives when they reach
the end user. Therefore, the committee believes that a
simplified supply chain, with synchronized manufacturing for
combat medical products, could lead to supply chain
efficiencies and cost savings to the Department of Defense
while ensuring that servicemembers have the best medical
products available to treat combat injuries.
Therapeutic research for traumatic brain injury
The committee continues to support the Department of
Defense's efforts to evaluate and treat servicemembers for
acute traumatic brain injury (TBI). The committee is aware of
recent advances in the development of therapeutics designed to
stimulate nerve regeneration and to promote brain plasticity.
These therapeutics hold great promise for recovery from TBI,
Alzheimer's disease, multiple sclerosis, and spinal cord
injury. Therefore, the committee encourages the Department to
continue investments in the development of therapeutics to
promote brain plasticity following TBI and other nervous system
disorders.
Trauma and public health training
The committee recognizes the valuable support universities
and hospitals provide to National Guard trauma and public
health training. Through civilian-based emergency response
trauma/critical care and public health training, the National
Guard is better prepared to face future medical challenges.
These public-private training collaborations help to sustain
the trauma and public health capabilities of the National Guard
Enhanced Response Forces Packages, National Guard Homeland
Response Forces, and National Guard Civil Support Teams.
TRICARE healthcare delivery demonstration project contracting
The Congress has enacted provisions that require the
Department of Defense to adopt a new private sector healthcare
delivery acquisition model to: (1) Foster innovation; (2)
Utilize value-based reimbursement methods; (3) Incorporate
local and regional health plans to provide greater beneficiary
choice; and (4) Improve healthcare quality and beneficiaries'
experience of care. The Defense Health Agency (DHA) has
conveyed to the committee its shared intent to achieve these
goals.
The committee recognizes, however, that there may be
contracting impediments to the entrance of new health system or
plan entrants into TRICARE that may inhibit adoption of value-
based reimbursement methods. The DHA should explore flexible
acquisition approaches to enable broader participation in its
purchased care programs. Therefore, the committee encourages
the Secretary of Defense to utilize authorities for direct
contracts with regional and local health care systems, payers,
and providers to incentivize participation in value-based
healthcare demonstrations. The committee further directs the
Secretary to utilize, for the purposes of demonstration
projects, acquisition methods that would safeguard the
Government's interests while providing greater contracting
flexibility.
TRICARE healthcare delivery demonstrations
The committee understands that the Defense Health Agency
(DHA) plans to implement healthcare delivery demonstrations,
separate from the upcoming TRICARE T-5 contract, to test a
multiple contract/multiple provider network approach to help
expand TRICARE beneficiary enrollment choices. A more localized
market approach to healthcare delivery may allow private sector
health plans and providers to better address the unique needs
of beneficiaries with innovative, value-based healthcare plan
options.
The committee is aware that the DHA plans to implement
these demonstrations soon after it awards a separate
administrative contract for management of TRICARE's
eligibility, enrollment, and encounter (EEE) processes. The
committee agrees with this construct and encourages the DHA to
time the award of an EEE contract and implementation of
demonstrations to coincide with transition to the T-5
contracts. Such timing would allow a more equitable comparison
of patient choice, healthcare quality, innovation, and cost
within these demonstrations to T-5 contracts.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing not later than September 1, 2021, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives that describes a plan to implement a
simultaneous acquisition strategy for the T-5 contracts, an EEE
contract, and independent healthcare demonstrations. The
briefing shall include a detailed description regarding how the
DHA intends to compare healthcare delivery models, including
the outcome measures that will be used to determine the
performance of various models.
Trusted domestic vaccine supplier capability
The committee is concerned about the availability of key
starting materials (KSMs), such as plasmid DNA and mRNA,
antibodies, and enzymes that are critical components in the
rapid production of important medical countermeasures against
biologic threats. Domestic manufacturing of KSMs can limit
dependence on foreign supplies and improve the response to
national health emergencies caused by pandemics. Therefore, the
committee recommends that the Department of Defense, through
the Defense Logistics Agency Strategic Materials division,
include KSMs as strategic materials in the National Defense
Stockpile. Long-term domestic storage of KSMs would facilitate
the swift development and allocation of medical countermeasures
against biologic threats, both to servicemembers and the
general public.
Virtual health expansion
The committee recognizes the important role that virtual
health and telemedicine services have played in advancing
health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic and acknowledges
that such services are increasingly relevant in deployed
environments or at remote and isolated military installations.
The committee supports the expansion of these services to
promote safe, accessible, and high quality medical care to all
servicemembers and their families.
Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the
Defense Health Agency to provide a briefing not later than
December 1, 2021, on its efforts to increase and improve
virtual health and telemedicine services available to
servicemembers and their families and the resources needed to
make those services more readily available. The briefing shall
include lessons learned and virtual health and telemedicine
best practices captured by the Department of Defense and
private sector health care systems during the global pandemic.
Additionally, the committee recognizes that such services are
highly dependent on reliable, high capacity broadband, which
may be limited or unavailable at many remote and isolated
military installations. The briefing shall include any
recommendations on resources required to ensure that
servicemembers and their families stationed at such
installations can fully utilize those services. These resources
shall include, but not be limited to, access to broadband
internet and personal computers.
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED
MATTERS
Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management
Repeal of preference for fixed-price contracts (sec. 801)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal the
preference for fixed-price contracts, previously established by
section 829 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328).
The committee notes that the preference for fixed-price
contracts was originally established as an effort to control
cost growth on large acquisition programs and to incentivize
contractors to actively manage costs. While the committee
remains concerned about acquisition cost growth, it recognizes
that the fixed-price contract type may not be suitable for all
acquisitions. With the repeal of the preference for fixed-price
contracts, the committee expects the Department of Defense to
select contract types and negotiate contract terms that are
appropriate for the product or service being acquired and that
effectively account for an acquisition program's risks,
requirements, and cost and schedule goals.
The committee also notes that the Department has used
fixed-price type contracts for the majority of major defense
acquisition program obligations fairly consistently over the
last several years.
The committee further notes that fixed-price type contracts
can be used to encourage better cost and schedule performance.
Fixed-price type contracts also are appropriate when
requirements are stable and technical and technology risks are
minimal and understood. Fixed-price contracts also remain
appropriate when the Department is purchasing commercial items.
Improving the use of available data to manage and forecast service
contract requirements (sec. 802)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
statutes governing the management and oversight of the
procurement of services and would require the Secretary of
Defense, Secretary of the Navy, and Secretary of the Air Force
to review and implement recommendations of the Government
Accountability Office (GAO), in a report published February 18,
2016, titled, ``DOD Service Acquisition: Improved Use of
Available Data Needed to Better Manage and Forecast Service
Contract Requirements'' (GAO-16-119), with respect to the
oversight and management of service contracts, or provide
rationale to the congressional defense committees for not
implementing such recommendations.
The committee notes that both sections 2329 and 235 of
title 10, United States Code, create requirements that the
Secretary of Defense must implement in managing the procurement
of services. To streamline reporting requirements and improve
the ability to understand trends and reduce duplication in such
contracting efforts, the committee recommends a provision that
would clarify the existing reporting requirements, make
technical corrections within section 2329 of title 10, United
States Code, and instruct the Secretary of Defense to issue
guidance to standardize service contract reviews across the
Department of Defense (DOD).
The committee also notes that the GAO has previously
recommended that the Secretary of Defense and military
departments revise project objective memorandum guidance,
coordinate efforts to forecast services, and fully comply with
statutory budget reporting requirements. The committee notes
that DOD concurred with the GAO recommendation on budget
reporting but did not identify actions it would take to address
the recommendations for revised guidance or coordination.
The committee notes that the DOD is making significant
progress in improving its data collection and analysis
capabilities for these types of management and oversight
functions through the Advana platform. The committee expects
that this effort will play a major role in improving the
effectiveness and efficiency of the oversight and management of
service contracting. The committee encourages the Secretary to
continue working with the Congress to improve budgetary
transparency, including related to contracting for services.
Assessment of impediments and incentives to improving the acquisition
of commercial technology, products, and services (sec. 803)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and
the Chairman of the Joint Requirements Oversight Council to
jointly assess impediments and incentives to fulfilling the
goals of sections 1906, 1907, and 3307 of title 41, United
States Code, and sections 2375-2377 of title 10, United States
Code, regarding preferences for commercial products and
services. The objective of the assessment is to enhance the
innovation strategy of the Department of Defense (DOD) to
compete effectively against peer adversaries by rapidly
adopting commercial technology advances.
DOD leaders consistently emphasize the critical importance
in the current great power competition of capitalizing quickly
on commercial technology advances in such areas as artificial
intelligence and machine learning, cloud computing, cloud-based
enterprise services, and software products and services.
However, the committee is concerned that, too often, DOD
components choose to contract for the development of custom
solutions when mature commercial capabilities exist that will
save time and money and provide better performance. The
committee is aware of instances where custom developments are
justified as ``open source'' or on the grounds that commercial
licenses are expensive. The committee is also aware that some
DOD officials view commercial software as untrustworthy and
argue that DOD should control the technical baseline through
in-house software development. The committee is further aware
that the requirements process, without careful attention, can
be used to effectively foreclose on commercial solutions even
before market research is conducted. Since DOD must have wide
discretion to pursue non-commercial solutions to most military
requirements, successful protests are rare, even when the
underlying facts support a commercial acquisition.
The committee recognizes that DOD must maintain technical
expertise in order to be a smart buyer, to manage programs
effectively, and in some cases, to undertake in-house
development. It is also important when weighing acquisition
options to consider sustainment requirements. Balancing these
factors appropriately requires leadership and unbiased
processes.
Pilot program on acquisition practices for emerging technologies (sec.
804)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish a
pilot program to develop and implement unique contracting
mechanisms for emerging technologies that seek to increase the
speed, flexibility, and competition of the Department of
Defense (DOD) acquisition process.
The committee notes that in testimony on February 23, 2021,
the Chairman of the National Security Commission on Artificial
Intelligence recommended that the Congress appoint a joint
committee to identify four DOD acquisition projects and apply
radically different procurement approaches to those projects to
explore options to improve DOD acquisition outcomes.
While the committee has worked to improve DOD acquisition
processes in recent years, the committee believes more work is
required to improve DOD acquisition outcomes.
Annual report on highest and lowest performing acquisition programs of
the Department of Defense (sec. 805)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to identify the highest and lowest
performing acquisition programs with significant expenditures
within the Department of Defense, according to criteria
developed by the Department. The provision would also direct
the decision authority for the lowest performing programs to
provide a report that outlines the factors behind the program's
performance and steps being taken to improve program
performance.
Systems engineering determinations (sec. 806)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
systems engineering determinations for transactions entered
into under certain legal authorities.
The committee notes that companies that develop emerging
technologies, are non-traditional, and/or are small businesses
have increasing opportunities to conduct initial demonstrations
and other activities with the Department of Defense but are
challenged in transitioning these products into programs-of-
record.
The committee believes the role of systems engineering
commands (SECs) (e.g., Naval Warfare Centers; Army Combat
Capabilities Development Command Centers; Air Force Research
Laboratory) should include the activities necessary to
transition promising technologies from a successful initial
demonstration to a program-of-record within the SEC's area of
expertise, including working with the product company and the
desired program executive officer (PEO) to develop and execute
a systems engineering plan (SEP) necessary to achieve
transition to the PEO.
The committee envisions the scope of each SEP being
tailored to the needs of each covered product, which may
include resolution of: interfaces, data rights, technical
warrant holder requirements, specific platform technical
integration, software development, subsystem prototyping,
reliability improvements, scale models, technical manuals, life
cycle sustainment needs, and PEO-identified needs.
The committee believes the benefits to the Government of
this provision should include SEC technical experts and test
equipment better able to: (1) Keep pace with emerging
technology; (2) Support covered products in-service; (3) Make
more informed recommendations to PEOs and other DOD leaders;
and (4) Provide greater clarity and accountability on the steps
necessary to transition covered products to programs-of-record.
The committee also believes the benefits to companies of
this provision should include greater clarity on the steps
necessary to transition a covered product to a program-of-
record, the Government's technical partners at the SEC and the
associated SEP, and identification of the associated funding.
Subtitle B--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities, Procedures,
and Limitations
Recommendations on the use of other transaction authority (sec. 811)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to review the current use, authorities,
regulations, and policies relative to the use of other
transaction authorities and make recommendations to the
Congress on possible modifications to the authorities. The
committee notes that the use of the other transaction authority
has increased significantly over the last few years and that
industry and independent experts have proposed a number of new
proposals for possible adjustments to the authorities. The
committee also is concerned about the differing interpretations
by Department of Defense counsels on the flexibilities
currently authorized, resulting in inconsistent application of
the authority and significant confusion among industry and
Government personnel.
Modified condition for prompt contract payment eligibility (sec. 812)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
conditions set forth in section 2307 of title 10, United States
Code, under which certain prime contractors are eligible for
accelerated payment timeframes. The committee reiterates its
expectation that prime contractors will flow accelerated
payments down to their subcontractors, particularly those
subcontractors that are small businesses.
Exclusion of certain services from intergovernmental support agreements
for installation-support services (sec. 813)
The committee recommends a provision that would make a
clarifying amendment to section 2679 of title 10, United States
Code.
Modification of prize authority for advanced technology achievements
(sec. 814)
The committee recommends a provision that would clarify
that the technology prize authority under section 2374a of
title 10, United States Code, can be used for the awarding of
procurement agreements. The committee notes that this
authority, originally established by the committee in the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public
Law 106-65), has been used successfully within the Department
of Defense to promote technological advancements in robotics,
space launch, spectrum technologies, biomedical technologies,
and other areas. The committee believes that it can be used to
more seamlessly and rapidly move successful technologies into
operational use.
Cost or pricing data reporting in Department of Defense contracts (sec.
815)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 2306a of title 10, United States Code, to make
conforming changes consistent with section 814 of the William
M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283).
Authority to acquire innovative commercial products and services using
general solicitation competitive procedures (sec. 816)
The committee recommends a provision that would permanently
authorize the Department of Defense to use what are commonly
known as Commercial Solutions Openings to solicit and acquire
innovative commercial items, technologies, or services.
The committee notes that this authority was originally
established in section 879 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) and
that it has been successfully used by the Department to
establish agreements with small businesses in technology areas
relevant to supporting the National Defense Strategy. The
committee also notes that this authority has been used
successfully by the Defense Innovation Unit and the Air Force
to support efforts to work with commercial sector firms, as
well as to support COVID-19 response activities.
Reporting requirement for defense acquisition activities (sec. 817)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish procedures to identify all
agreements awarded to entities through the use of an Other
Transaction (OT) consortia, OTs, individual task orders awarded
under a task order contract, and individual task orders issued
to a federally funded research and development center. For
example, the committee notes that the Department of Defense
(DOD) Inspector General found that ``the [DOD] did not properly
track and could not readily account for all OTs awarded through
consortiums'' in an April 2021 report (DODIG-2021-077).
Additionally, the committee is concerned about the lack of
transparency on these types of awards. As such, the provision
would also require the Secretary to establish mechanisms to
publicize awards, similar to those currently in place for
contracts.
Department of Defense contractor professional training material
disclosure requirements (sec. 818)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to require all Department of Defense
contractors to disclose certain training materials for review.
Report on place of performance requirements (sec. 819)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to improve contract place of performance
data and report on its use. The committee notes that the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) raised concerns about
the consistency in the interpretation and entry of place of
performance contract data in a report, published November 8,
2017, titled, ``OMB, Treasury, and Agencies Need to Improve
Completeness and Accuracy of Spending Data and Disclose
Limitations'' (GAO-18-138). The committee directs the Secretary
of Defense to review its guidance, policies, and training to
ensure consistency in place of performance data. The committee
also notes that the COVID-19 pandemic has changed the manner in
which the Federal Government and the Department of Defense
conduct business. With an increased focus on remote work, the
committee believes an assessment of the Department of Defense's
use of place of performance clauses is necessary.
Multiyear contract authority for defense acquisitions specifically
authorized by law (sec. 820)
The committee recommends a provision that would add an
additional criterion to the certifications required for
approving a multiyear procurement contract.
The committee notes the budget request would breach a
multiyear contract for Arleigh Burke-class destroyers entered
into under authority provided in section 2306b of title 10,
United States Code. The committee believes such an action would
set an unacceptable precedent and undermine future confidence
in entering into these highly cost effective and stabilizing
contractual agreements.
Accordingly, this provision would require the Secretary of
Defense to certify, as part of an existing certification
required under section 2306b of title 10, United States Code,
that the Department of Defense will not reduce the quantity of
end items that would be procured with a multiyear contract in
each fiscal year of the future years defense program planned at
the time of contract award without prior approval from the
congressional defense committees.
Subtitle C--Industrial Base Matters
Addition of certain items to list of high priority goods and services
for analyses, recommendations, and actions related to sourcing
and industrial capacity (sec. 831)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 849 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) by
adding U.S. producers as a category for the Department of
Defense to consider for potential restricted procurement and
items to the list of high priority goods and services for
analyses, recommendations, and actions.
Prohibition on acquisition of personal protective equipment from non-
allied foreign nations (sec. 832)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Secretary of Defense from procuring personal protective
equipment (PPE) manufactured in China, Russia, North Korea, or
Iran. It would authorize limited waivers to the prohibition for
small purchases, for the use of PPE outside the United States,
and for cases in which satisfactory PPE cannot be purchased
from other sources at reasonable cost or to meet requirements.
Further prohibition on acquisition of sensitive materials (sec. 833)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2533c of title 10, United States Code, to add covered
companies to the existing prohibition of sensitive materials
from non-allied foreign nations.
Requirement for industry days and requests for information to be open
to allied defense contractors (sec. 834)
The committee recommends a provision that would make, to
the maximum extent practicable, industry days and requests for
information open to defense contractors from the national
technology and industrial base.
Assessment of requirements for certain items to address supply chain
vulnerabilities (sec. 835)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to assess the Department of Defense's
requirements for dual-use items covered by section 2533a of
title 10, United States Code. The provision would also require
the Secretary to submit a report of the Department's findings
to the congressional defense committees not later than October
1, 2022.
Requirement that certain providers of systems to Department of Defense
disclose the source of printed circuit boards when sourced from
certain countries (sec. 836)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
that certain providers of systems to the Department of Defense
disclose the source of printed circuit boards when sourced from
certain countries.
Employment transparency regarding individuals who perform work in the
People's Republic of China (sec. 837)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to require defense contractors to disclose
their use of workforce and facilities in the People's Republic
of China in the performance of certain defense contracts.
Subtitle D--Small Business Matters
Clarification of duties of Director of Small Business Programs (sec.
841)
The committee recommends a provision that would clarify
that the duties of the Department of Defense's (DOD) Director
of Small Business Programs include strengthening the small
businesses in the national technology and industrial base. The
committee notes that small businesses represent an important
element of the defense industrial base, including acting as key
suppliers of defense products and services; serving as key
subcontractors on major acquisition programs; and developing
and delivering advanced and innovative technologies to the
warfighter.
The committee notes that the Director of Small Business
programs within the Department of Defense reports to the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy,
which is a different reporting chain than other Federal
agencies, which are mandated to make the Directors report to
Cabinet secretaries. The committee further notes that the title
``Director'' is not consistent with typical position titles
within DOD and that the successful Small Business Innovation
Research program is not managed by the Director of Small
Business Programs but instead by the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering. These
reporting arrangements, titles, and organizational assignments
may have both positive and negative impacts on the execution of
small business programs.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the congressional defense committees, not later
than March 1, 2022, assessing these issues; providing
justification for the current status of the title, reporting,
and authorities of the Director of Small Business Programs;
outlining any changes to these that would benefit defense
missions; and making recommendations for any statutory changes
that are needed to effect such changes.
Data on Phase III Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business
Technology Transfer program awards (sec. 842)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretaries of the military departments to collect data on
Phase III awards under the Small Business Innovation Research
and Small Business Technology Transfer programs and submit such
data to the President for inclusion in the budget submitted to
the Congress under section 1105 of title 31, United States
Code.
Pilot program to incentivize employee ownership in defense contracting
(sec. 843)
The committee recommends a provision that would permit the
Secretary of Defense to carry out a 5-year pilot program that
allows for the use of noncompetitive procedures for follow-on
contracts to qualified businesses wholly owned by an Employee
Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP). The Department of Defense may
benefit from the workforce talent attracted by businesses that
are owned entirely by an ESOP. However, as a June 18, 2020,
Government Accountability Office (GAO) study, titled ``Defense
Contracting: DOD Contracts with Companies Having Employee Stock
Ownership Plans'' (GAO-20-514R), showed, there are no readily
available data to determine what percent of an entity is owned
by an ESOP. Therefore, a pilot program will provide the
Department with information to understand the potential use and
benefits of allowing such noncompetitive procedures and whether
these procedures create incentives for qualified businesses to
continue working with the Department.
In addition, the provision would require the Comptroller
General of the United States to submit a report to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the Department's use of the pilot not later
than 3 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Technology protection features activities (sec. 851)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2357 of title 10, United States Code, to allow the
contractor's share of costs for the technology protection
features activities for certain designated systems to be
treated as allowable independent research and development. The
committee notes that these technology protection features make
it possible for defense contractors to export appropriate
technologies to allied and friendly nations, with resultant
economic and national security benefits. The committee believes
that these kinds of activities will facilitate greater
cooperation between industry and the Department of Defense in
achieving the National Defense Strategy goal of deepening
interoperability between the United States and partner nations.
Independent study on technical debt in software-intensive systems (sec.
852)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to enter into an agreement with a
federally funded research and development center to perform a
study on defense software-intensive systems that can identify
and assess technical debt and make recommendations on best
practices for the Department of Defense to employ to manage
technical debt. The committee notes that in the course of
developing software-intensive systems in the Department of
Defense, accumulation of ``technical debt'' is common.
``Technical debt'' in software systems reflects the use of
design approaches that are expedient and lower cost in the
short term, but that create a system that increases costs to
sustain and maintain the systems over time. This also leads to
increasing delays in delivering new features and an inability
to fix software defects, vulnerabilities, and design issues due
to increasing and often unintended system complexity.
Determination with respect to optical fiber transmission equipment for
Department of Defense purposes (sec. 853)
The committee recommends a provision that would require a
review and determination with respect to optical fiber
transmission equipment for Department of Defense (DOD)
purposes.
The committee notes the DOD expressed concern regarding
China's industrial strategy for international communications
and concluded that China is poised to be a leader and a
standard-setter in 5G by dominating the global fiber optic
market through a heavily state-supported system in its December
2020 ``Report Evaluating the Risk to the Supply Chain for Fiber
and Related Telecommunications Components'' in response to the
explanatory statement accompanying the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2020 (Public Law 116-93).
The committee is concerned China may use trade protection,
discriminatory procurement, and forced technology transfer
policies to dispose of surplus optical fiber transmission
equipment in a manner that would be contrary to the national
security interests of the United States.
Two-year extension of Selected Acquisition Report requirement (sec.
854)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
requirement for Selected Acquisition Reports, as established
under section 2432 of title 10, United States Code, through
fiscal year 2023, and require a demonstration of the
replacement reporting system that includes the Department of
Defense's plan for implementing such a system.
The committee recognizes that the Secretary of Defense is
in the process of developing an alternate approach for
reporting on defense acquisition programs, pursuant to section
830 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2020 (Public Law 116-92). The committee supports these ongoing
efforts and notes the importance of replacing the Selected
Acquisition Report requirement with an updated reporting
construct for all acquisition programs that can be tailored to
the acquisition pathways of the Department of Defense's new
Adaptive Acquisition Framework. However, until these efforts
are fully developed and implemented, the committee believes the
requirement for Selected Acquisition Reports should be
maintained to ensure the Congress continues to receive critical
information about the cost, schedule, performance, and other
challenges of the Department of Defense's largest acquisition
programs.
Military standards for high-hardness armor in combat vehicle
specifications (sec. 855)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Army to provide a report to the congressional
defense committees, not later than January 31, 2022, on its
establishment of military standards for high-hardness armor and
its strategy for incorporating those standards into combat
vehicle specifications.
Revisions to the Unified Facilities Criteria regarding the use of
variable refrigerant flow systems (sec. 856)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Department of Defense to publish any proposed revision to the
Unified Facilities Criteria regarding the use of variable
refrigerant flow systems in the Federal Register and specify a
comment period of at least 60 days.
The committee encourages the Department to pursue the use
of variable refrigerant flow systems in its facilities to
maximize efficiency along with reducing costs and energy use.
Items of Special Interest
Acquisition of synthetic graphite material
The committee notes that section 849 of the William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) directed the Department of
Defense to analyze sourcing and industrial capacity for
synthetic graphite and other strategic materials. In addition,
section 848 instructed the Department to acquire strategic and
critical materials from sources within the United States prior
to purchasing from key allies. The committee believes that
creating domestic demand for synthetic graphite will bolster
the existing industry to ensure it can provide the Department,
industry, and civilian needs with a secure supply of synthetic
graphite.
Accordingly, the committee urges the Secretary of Defense,
to the maximum extent practicable, to acquire synthetic
graphite material, which is a strategic and critical material
for defense, industrial, and civilian needs, in the following
order of preference: (1) From sources domestically owned and
produced; (2) From sources located within the United States or
the national technology and industrial base; (3) Suppliers in
other allied nations; or (4) From other sources, as
appropriate.
Agile weapons system sustainment
The committee understands that increasingly complex and
software-reliant weapons systems have challenged some existing
sustainment and modernization practices. While recognizing
safeguards are needed to protect intellectual property, the
committee also believes weapons systems need agile sustainment
and modernization methods in order to maximize the combat power
available to operational commanders.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of each
military department to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees, not later than March 1, 2022, on weapons
systems intellectual property safeguards and approaches to
agile sustainment and modernization. This report shall include
the following elements for at least five illustrative weapons
systems within the military department:
(1) The types of technical data needed to sustain or
increase readiness and gain sustainment efficiencies;
(2) Steps or actions the department has taken to
obtain the technical data needed to sustain or increase
readiness and gain sustainment efficiencies;
(3) Obstacles that inhibit or may inhibit the ability
of the department to obtain the technical data needed
for readiness and sustainment; and
(4) Other matters the Secretary deems appropriate.
Comptroller General review of flexible budget and financial management
authorities
The committee notes that the Congress has provided the
Department of Defense (DOD) some flexibility in the budgeting,
financial management, and expenditure of funds over the years,
especially in order to support research, development, and other
innovation and modernization activities. For example, the
Congress has provided special authority for a new research,
development, test, and evaluation budget activity to support
software development programs, allowed for some flexibility in
the expenditure of funds under rapid acquisition and fielding
programs to support accelerated development and deployment of
new technologies, and created special authorities to support
certain military construction projects both at defense labs and
test ranges and at other DOD facilities. The committee is
interested in understanding how the Department has used these
authorities and their effect on acquisition.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to conduct a comprehensive assessment of
these and other similar special authorities, to include a
review of the extent of their use and their effectiveness in
furthering defense innovation and military missions. The
Comptroller General shall submit this review to the Committees
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives not later than March 1, 2022.
Incentives to promote the use of energy efficient manufacturing
technologies
The Secretary of Defense shall provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees not later than January 1,
2023, analyzing the possible use of incentives to promote the
adoption of energy efficient manufacturing technologies by the
defense industrial base, including: (1) The organic industrial
base; (2) The feasibility of the Department in implementing
such incentives; (3) The costs and benefits of using such
incentives; (4) The costs and benefits of such adoption to the
efficient and effective execution of Defense missions; and (5)
Policies that would support the participation of small
businesses in the development and adoption of such
technologies.
National technology and industrial base
The committee is concerned about the pace of implementation
of policies and procedures necessary to enhance the national
technology and industrial base (NTIB) consistent with section
881 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2017 (Public Law 114-328). The intended seamless integration of
the industrial bases of the countries that comprise the NTIB,
to include the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, and
Canada, has yet to occur as a result of the expansion of the
NTIB in that Act. As the United States seeks to address the
threat from China, these countries will become even more
important to the national security strategies of the United
States. There is a need for greater industrial information
sharing and the harmonization of allied plans and policies for
foreign investment review, export control, and the movement of
critical supplies and materials that are currently being
manufactured in China. This harmonization and industrial base
integration must occur within a community of nations where the
United States has its highest level of intelligence information
sharing and cooperation to establish the pathway for broader
industrial partnerships with other allies who share the common
national security goal of the United States while protecting
the viability of U.S. suppliers or producers and with
consideration to existing agreements.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess the current state of the
implementation and effectiveness of the plan required by
section 881 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017 and provide a briefing to the congressional
defense committees on its preliminary findings not later than
October 1, 2022, and to submit a report to the committees on an
agreed-upon date. Specifically, the Comptroller General shall
review progress made in reducing the barriers to the seamless
integration between the persons and organizations that comprise
the NTIB, as defined by section 2500 of title 10, United States
Code, and recommend actions necessary to fully implement the
plan.
Past performance by subcontractors and predecessor companies
The committee notes that Federal contracting regulations
require that contracting officials consider past performance
when evaluating contract proposals and describe the scope of
that performance in their evaluations. The regulations also
include guidance that contractor evaluations should take into
account past performance information regarding predecessor
companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or
subcontractors that will perform major aspects of the
requirement when such information is relevant to the
acquisition. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees, not
later than March 1, 2022, providing a summary of the Federal
and Department of Defense policies related to consideration of
past performance by subcontractors and predecessor companies at
both the prime and subcontractor level; the guidance provided
to acquisition workforce and industry relating to these
considerations; and any challenges that the Department has in
collecting, performing analyses on, or using this information.
Policy modeling and testing
The committee notes the work that the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment has done in
establishing the Acquisition Innovation Research Center (AIRC)
as mandated by section 2361a of title 10, United States Code.
The committee also notes that this effort will allow world-
leading academic researchers to study and make recommendations
on addressing the myriad policy and practice challenges facing
the Department of Defense as it seeks to modernize acquisition
efforts to support the National Defense Strategy.
The committee understands that the Under Secretary has
engaged with many university experts on a broad range of
engineering, business, social science, and management
disciplines, as well as acquisition experts within the
Department to identify key challenges that can be addressed by
activities of the AIRC. The committee recommends that the Under
Secretary continues to work to fully establish the AIRC and
expand its programs.
The committee notes that the last decade has seen a surge
in efforts to reform acquisition. Numerous new policies and
pilot programs have been mandated by the Congress or
established by the Department with the intent of improving
acquisition practices to meet the needs of the acquisition
programs and operational users.
The committee notes that, unlike the hardware, systems, and
software communities, acquisition policymakers have little
capability to test and model proposed acquisition policy
changes in the equivalent of computer simulations or ``test
ranges.'' Poorly designed and tested policy changes have a
negative effect on both Government and industry, create
bureaucratic process problems, and lead to confusion in the
acquisition community.
The committee believes that a robust policy modeling and
testing capability would refine analyses of new policy
proposals to improve their effectiveness in positively
reforming acquisition practices. The committee directs the
Under Secretary to engage the AIRC on an activity to develop a
capability to model and test proposed policy changes to better
assess the effectiveness and suitability for use prior to
changes being made to law, regulation, or acquisition
practices.
Report on contracting for procurement of body armor
The committee notes that the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) and the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-
91) placed restrictions on the use of lowest priced technically
acceptable (LPTA) contracting for personal protective
equipment. As of October 1, 2019, Defense regulations prohibit
the Department of Defense's use of LPTA when procuring personal
protective equipment for which the level of quality or failure
of the equipment or item could result in combat casualties.
The committee recognizes the importance of obtaining high-
quality personal protective equipment and avoiding the use of
LPTA contracting for the procurement of body armor. Therefore,
the committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment to provide a briefing, not later
than January 31, 2022, on the Department's contracting for body
armor. The briefing shall include: (1) A description of the
methods of contracting being used to procure body armor; (2) An
assessment of the compliance of the contracting methods being
used with the law promulgated by the National Defense
Authorization Acts for fiscal years 2017 and 2018; and (3) An
assessment of whether the use of ``fair opportunity to
compete'' for the procurement of body armor circumvents the
intent of the restrictions on the use of LPTA contracting to
procure body armor.
Report on life cycle share-in-savings contracts
The committee understands that Federal agencies have
successfully implemented share-in-savings contracting related
to energy savings performance contracts (ESPC) pursuant to
section 8287 of title 42, United States Code. The committee
believes greater use of these types of contracts, as applied to
operations and sustainment technologies and missions, could
enable the Department of Defense to realize savings while
improving military readiness with appropriate contract
performance incentives.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide
the congressional defense committees a report on the
Department's assessment of the potential to use share-in-
savings contracts to reduce weapon system life cycle costs. The
report shall be submitted not later than November 1, 2022, in
unclassified form but may include a classified annex.
The report shall include, at a minimum:
(1) Analysis of current statutory and policy
obstacles to share-in-savings contracting to reduce
life cycle costs, and proposed policy changes to create
incentives for private sector investments in
technologies that would reduce life cycle costs;
(2) Recommendations for processes for documenting
auditable cost savings accruing to the Government based
on application of new technologies intended to reduce
life cycle costs;
(3) Recommendations for processes for determining the
contractor's share in these auditable savings;
(4) Quantitative measures of readiness that could
serve as required performance measures to be sustained
or improved under share-in-savings contracts;
(5) Acquisition strategies that will facilitate
multiyear share-in-savings contracts;
(6) Best practices for negotiating performance
requirements, both initially and at specific points
over the course of the contract;
(7) Assessment of benefits accruing to the Government
beyond cost reductions, such as improved agility for
accommodating technological improvements; and
(8) Other related matters the Secretary deems
appropriate.
Small Business Innovation Research and commercial item purchasing
program training
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to establish
training activities for contracting officers and the Department
of Defense (DOD) acquisition workforce to ensure that such
individuals are fully aware of flexibilities designed to
streamline contracting methods to improve the Department's
ability to work with innovative small businesses. The committee
notes that the training topics should include market research,
commercial item preferences, the missions and authorities of
the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR), the use of SBIR
Phase III funding to transition innovative technologies to DOD
acquisition programs and for operational use, and the use of
Other Transactions and other flexible contracting authorities
to support small business participation in the defense
industrial base.
Small Business Innovation Research and the Small Business Technology
Transfer programs
The committee appreciates the importance of an expeditious
contracting process for small businesses working with the
Department of Defense under the Small Business Innovation
Research (SBIR) and the Small Business Technology Transfer
(STTR) programs. Section 864 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91)
provided for other transaction authority for small businesses
participating in SBIR or STTR, allowing for further flexibility
for the Department and small businesses. The committee
understands that there are additional authorities that may be
useful to decrease the burden on small businesses to work with
the Department. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary
of Defense to provide a briefing, not later than March 1, 2022,
on the benefits and drawbacks of using simplified acquisition
procedures for SBIR and STTR contracts in excess of the
simplified acquisition threshold.
Submission of selected acquisition reports
The committee notes that the Department of Defense is not
producing Selected Acquisition Reports (SARs) in fiscal year
2022 as statutorily required by section 2430 of title 10,
United States Code.
The committee also notes that while it is not uncommon in
the first year of a new administration to exclude a future
years defense program (FYDP), the last administration included
an FYDP with its budget in its first year and produced SARs,
albeit late, as statutorily required.
Without the benefit of an FYDP, the Congress and the
defense committees will not have visibility into the cost,
schedule, and performance changes of the largest and costliest
defense acquisition programs. In addition, the Secretaries of
the Army, Navy, and Air Force and the military service chiefs
cannot certify the health of these programs, including that
funding is stable and adequate to meet cost, schedule, and
performance objectives.
The committee is concerned that without SARs submitted on a
quarterly basis during the fiscal year, the Congress will not
have insight into programs entering and exiting the major
defense acquisition pathways, programs experiencing unit cost
increases of at least 15 percent, schedule delays of at least 6
months, or programs that rebaselined cost or schedule at major
milestone decisions.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
report to the congressional defense committees not later than
March 1, 2022, that details options to provide the Congress
information as statutorily required in future first years of
administrations or in years during which an FYDP is not
developed.
Support of fourth-party logistics program
The committee acknowledges that the Department of Defense
(DOD) has successfully used the General Services
Administration's (GSA's) Retail Operations, which provides
fourth-party logistics solutions, to obtain crucial industrial
supplies and services for the U.S. military. Using GSA's Retail
Operations, the DOD has leveraged GSA's acquisition expertise
to help meet the military services' logistics and supply needs
in the United States and around the world. The committee
supports the DOD's efforts to leverage other agencies'
capabilities and innovative acquisition practices to meet its
logistics and supply needs.
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
Change in eligibility requirements for appointment to certain
Department of Defense leadership positions (sec. 901)
The committee recommends a provision that establishes a
requirement for the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special
Operations and Low Intensity Conflict (ASD SOLIC) to not be
within seven years relieved from Active Duty as a commissioned
officer of a regular component of an armed force in order to be
appointed to the position. The provision would also amend
sections 7013, 8013, and 9013 of title 10, United States Code,
to provide consistency in the requirements for persons
appointed to the position of a secretary of a military
department with other civilians appointed to senior leadership
positions within the Department of Defense.
The committee notes that the ASD SOLIC has ``service
secretary-like'' responsibilities for exercising authority,
direction, and control of all special operations-peculiar
administrative matters relating to the organization, training,
and equipping of special operations forces. However, unlike a
secretary of a military department, there is no statutory
requirement for an individual to be relieved from Active-Duty
service for a specified period of time before being appointed
as the ASD SOLIC. In addition, civilians appointed to be a
secretary of a military department are required to be only five
years separated from Active-Duty service. This conflicts with
the seven-year requirement for civilians who serve in senior
civilian leadership positions within the Office of the
Secretary of Defense, to include the Deputy Secretary of
Defense or an Under Secretary of Defense.
Earlier this year, the committee held a hearing on civilian
control of the Armed Forces. The committee heard expert
testimony that a seven-year waiting period strengthened
civilian control of the military because it ``allows a minimum
of two rotations for military deployments and assignments,
which means that allows time for the command relationships and
the people in those command positions to change significantly
from the time that the recently retired officer was in a
position of commands.'' Furthermore, another expert witness
testified ``that Congress has also strengthened the norm in
other ways, in particular by, in recent years, extending the
statutory cooling-off period to key civilian appointments
within the Department of Defense. So the Congress appears to
have started to look at civilian control of the military and
its expression in these appointments more holistically across
the Department and across these different positions.''
Prior military service is not a disqualifying factor for
serving in a senior civilian position in the Department of
Defense. In fact, many former members of the Armed Forces have
served their country with distinction as civilians after
leaving military service. However, it is important that there
is a diversity of opinion when crafting policy and making
decisions that are critical to U.S. national defense. As such,
creating a uniform threshold for service for the secretaries of
the military departments and ASD SOLIC may enhance the advice
provided to the Secretary of Defense, and ultimately to the
President, and would send a strong signal that the principle of
civilian control of the military is essential to the American
democratic system of government.
Renaming of Air National Guard to Air and Space National Guard (sec.
902)
The committee recommends a provision that would change the
name of the Air National Guard to the Air and Space National
Guard to account for the creation of the Space Force in the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public
Law 116-92). The committee believes this is the most efficient
use of scarce funding based on the number of personnel
performing space missions in the existing Air National Guard
and the size of the Space Force. The provision would also
require the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees, not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, on a plan and any
necessary changes in law to implement this section.
Joint Aviation Safety Council (sec. 903)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish,
within the Office of the Secretary of Defense, a Joint Aviation
Safety Council to advise the Secretary of Defense and the
Secretaries of the military departments on aviation safety
issues. The provision would also recommend an increase of $4.0
million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide SAG 4GTN,
for the Council.
Assignments for participants in the John S. McCain Strategic Defense
Fellows Program (sec. 904)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 932 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232) to
provide more flexibility in the assignment of fellows
participating in the John S. McCain Strategic Defense Fellows
Program. The provision would also authorize the Secretary of
Defense to require a minimum service obligation for
participants in exchange for receipt of certain education loan
repayment benefits.
Alignment of Close Combat Lethality Task Force (sec. 905)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of Defense to return the Close Combat Lethality Task
Force (CCLTF) to its initial alignment and status as a direct
reporting activity to the Secretary of Defense, including its
designation as a Cross Functional Team (CFT) under section 911
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017
(Public Law 114-328), until such time the Secretary provides a
report on an alternative alignment of the CCLTF. The report
would require details of the proposed alternative alignment and
supporting analysis, including: how the alternative alignment
would facilitate the effective pursuit of, and support for,
both material and non-material initiatives; how the alternative
alignment would maintain benefits similar to designation as a
CFT and alignment as a direct-reporting activity to the
Secretary of Defense; how the alternative alignment would
ensure collaboration and support from, the primary CCLTF
stakeholders, the U.S. Army, the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC), and
U.S. Special Operations (SOCOM) Command; and how the
alternatively-aligned CFT would be funded and gain appropriate
resourcing for CFT initiatives supported by the Secretary of
Defense.
As previously expressed in the Senate report accompanying
S. 1790 (S. Rept 116-48) of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2020, the committee remains concerned about
the ability of the CCLTF to affect its charter of dramatically
improving the effectiveness and survivability of close combat
formations through a combination of materiel and non-materiel
means. Established in March 2018 as a direct report to the
Secretary of Defense, the CCLTF was designated a Cross
Functional Team (CFT) under section 911 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 to be able to leverage
the critical enabling authorities of that law.
In March 2020, the Secretary of Defense directed the
transfer of the CCLTF to the Secretary of the Army with a
tasking to determine alignment of the CCLTF within the Army.
This transfer effectively ended the CCLTF's status as a direct
reporting activity to the Secretary of Defense and its
designation as a CFT under section 911. Since the transfer, the
Army has failed to gain support from the primary CCLTF
partners, SOCOM and the USMC, for its alignment within the
Army, and the organization has lost manning, lost leadership
support, and become essentially ineffective in executing its
charter.
Management innovation activities (sec. 906)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a set of management
innovation activities, with a goal of incorporating appropriate
private sector management practices and technologies and
enhancing the capabilities of the Defense management workforce.
The committee received testimony from management expert
witnesses who made a series of recommendations to improve the
Department of Defense's ability to manage its multi-billion
dollar business operations enterprise, which includes some of
the world's largest financial, logistics, education and
training, healthcare, and data systems resident in any single
organization. Despite this vast business and management
mission, and the fact that defense reform is a pillar of the
National Defense Strategy, senior leaders in the Department of
Defense often view management reform as being limited to
efforts to cut civilian workforce or weapons programs and
reduce spending on information technology (IT) and data
modernization. The committee notes that the management
challenges identified by the witnesses and annually by the
Comptroller General of the United States as part of the High
Risk list and countless reports are not ``back office'' issues
but are critical to executing defense missions. Even seemingly
minor improvements in management and business processes can
have outsized effects at the scale of the Department of
Defense.
Management inefficiencies and a culture of bureaucratic
stasis use valuable resources and time by creating unnecessary
waste. They slow the delivery of new and needed capabilities to
deployed forces at a time when technological change is
happening at accelerated rates while stifling the creativity of
uniformed, civilian, and contractor personnel. Over time, they
drive high-performing personnel out of public service due to
frustration, further exacerbating the downward spiral of
mismanagement.
The committee notes that, unlike other areas where the
Department makes focused efforts on innovation and
modernization, there is little focused effort on management
innovation activities with a goal to improving processes and
practices. Unlike the identified modernization priorities of
the Department, there are no robust, established systems of
leveraging commercial management innovation and expertise to
support Department missions; there are no serious efforts by
the senior officials responsible for acquisition, technology,
and research to improve practices and technologies to support
management modernization, such as in data analytics, policy
research, or prototyping of new business processes; and there
are no strong ties, such as research programs or personnel
exchanges, established to the innovation and talent resident at
world-leading business, management, and public administration
universities. Further, there are no systems to test new
management concepts or experiment with new management
techniques appropriate for the unique and idiosyncratic
bureaucratic and cultural norms of the Department of Defense,
and there is no equivalent to the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency or Defense Innovation Unit to develop and
pioneer the defense management practices of the future.
Items of Special Interest
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity
Conflict
The committee strongly supports the issuance of Department
of Defense guidance on May 5, 2021, that clearly articulates
the role of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special
Operations and Low Intensity Conflict (ASD SOLIC) in the
oversight of and advocacy for U.S. Special Operations Command.
Though long overdue, the committee believes this guidance is a
meaningful signal of the Department's commitment to fully
implement the ASD SOLIC reforms mandated by the Congress.
The committee looks forward to continuing to work with the
Department to institutionalize the ``service secretary-like''
responsibilities of the ASD SOLIC as the Principal Staff
Assistant reporting directly to the Secretary of Defense and
the civilian official tasked with exercising of authority,
direction, and control of all special operations-peculiar
administrative matters relating to the organization, training,
and equipping of special operations forces. The committee
appreciates the commitment of the Department to ensure the ASD
SOLIC is included in senior leader fora and maintains dedicated
resources and grows to a level commensurate with its increased
responsibilities.
Lastly, the committee directs the Department to conduct an
updated manpower study to validate the number and types of
personnel necessary to support the activities of the
Secretariat for Special Operations and consider the issuance of
additional agreements, understandings, arrangements, and
similar instruments necessary to formalize the ``service
secretary-like'' role of the ASD SOLIC.
Component content management systems
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense's
approach to managing technical data and artifacts is outdated.
The Department uses millions of pages of technical data,
regulations, guidance, and other artifacts that are often
manually updated and transmitted within the Department. Current
methods for content management at the Department are so
outdated and byzantine that the Department has developed
specialized search engines to find content within its own
environment.
The committee recognizes that commercial technological
advances have revolutionized how content is created, protected,
organized, and securely disseminated. The Department of Defense
could significantly reduce costs by adopting modern component
content management software and commercial best practices to
drastically lower organizational friction, reduce manual
content management costs, and improve efficiency throughout the
organization.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than
March 1, 2022, on the applicability of component content
management software to the Department's content management
challenges and on any plans to increase the usage of such
software to modernize content management capabilities.
Personnel requirements for functions previously carried out by the
Chief Management Officer
The committee looks forward to reviewing the report from
the Secretary of Defense on the future of functions previously
carried out by the Chief Management Officer, as required by
section 901 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283).
The committee understands that the former Deputy Secretary of
Defense issued a memorandum in January 2021 recommending
interim reassignment of certain functions previously carried
out by the Chief Management Officer to organizations within the
Department of Defense. The committee encourages the Secretary
of Defense to seriously consider the sufficiency of the
capacity and capability of existing organizations and their
workforces in deciding where to permanently relocate these
functions within the Department.
Remote work information technology
The committee notes that COVID-related work-from-home
arrangements and growing cyber threats have only increased the
imperative that the Department of Defense realize the dramatic
operational, security, and cost improvements from modern
information, networking, and communications technologies,
including cloud computing. The committee strongly urges the
Department to emphasize technology modernization and cloud
migration efforts while balancing security requirements, to
include incorporating appropriate commercial information
technology solutions, with a goal of improving workforce
productivity through remote work arrangements.
Workforce management training
The committee supports the Department of Defense's
dedication to professional and workforce development, however
it notes continued challenges associated with enterprise
management. The committee is concerned these management
inefficiencies can easily impact dozens of organizations,
thousands of employees, cost tens of millions of dollars, and
undermine the effectiveness of key warfighter support
functions. To that end, the committee believes the Department
can enhance relationships between Department educational
institutions and civilian colleges and universities to improve
management training. Therefore, the committee urges the
Secretary of Defense to identify and develop relationships with
private sector colleges and universities for the purposes of
enhancing the Department's management training efforts. The
committee also directs the Secretary to provide a briefing to
the congressional defense committees on: (1) Existing
management training initiatives at Department educational
institutions, and (2) Opportunities for enhanced collaboration
between Department educational institutions and colleges and
universities on management training not later than July 1,
2022.
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Financial Matters
General transfer authority (sec. 1001)
The committee recommends a provision that would allow the
Secretary of Defense to transfer up to $6.0 billion of fiscal
year 2022 funds authorized in division A of this Act to
unforeseen higher priority needs in accordance with normal
reprogramming procedures. Transfers of funds between military
personnel authorizations would not be counted toward the dollar
limitation in this provision.
Commission on Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution Reform
(sec. 1002)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish a
Commission on Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution
(PPBE) Reform tasked with providing an independent review and
assessment of the PPBE process of the Department of Defense
(DOD).
The PPBE process was first designed and implemented by
Secretary Robert McNamara 60 years ago, with little change in
the intervening years. The committee has heard from a variety
of experts and DOD officials who have suggested that aspects of
the PPBE process need to be modernized to reflect the speed of
21st century programs and technologies that evolve faster than
the current cycle of the PPBE process, as well as to respond to
the complexity of threats DOD faces today. To inform the
committee and the Department on those aspects in need of
reform, this commission would assess the efficacy and
efficiency of all phases of the PPBE process and provide its
recommendations to the Secretary of Defense and to the
Congress.
The committee notes that there are obstacles in the
programming and budgeting processes to the rapid development
and integration of new war-fighting capabilities and directs
the Commission to analyze these obstacles and make
recommendations to overcome them. The committee notes that
these obstacles may involve acquisition policies and practices
for emerging technologies; the inefficient use and sharing of
data across DOD organizations; and DOD bureaucratic and
programmatic risk tolerance and risk management practices.
The committee expects the Department of Defense to fully
cooperate with the Commission established under this provision
during its review of the PPBE process and ensure it has the
support necessary to fulfill its mandate.
Plan for consolidation of information technology systems used in the
planning, programming, budgeting, and execution process (sec.
1003)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), in consultation with
the Chief Information Officer and the Chief Data Officer, to
submit to the congressional defense committees, not later than
180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, a plan to
consolidate the information technology (IT) systems used to
manage data and support the planning, programming, budgeting,
and execution (PPBE) process of the Department of Defense. Such
a plan for consolidation should incorporate those systems used
by the military departments as well as those used by the
Defense-wide Agencies, and should address the retirement or
elimination of such systems.
The committee notes that, in response to a direction in the
Senate report accompanying S. 4049 (S. Rept. 116-236) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, the
Office of the Deputy Chief Financial Officer submitted a report
to the committee on October 1, 2020, outlining the results of
its review of the IT systems used to manage data. The report
concluded that there are 132 unique systems across the
Department of Defense that support planning, programming, and
budgeting decisions. The committee acknowledges that the
Departments of the Army, Air Force, and Navy have developed
initial retirement and consolidation plans for their general
ledger financial management systems and urges these military
departments to expeditiously complete and implement these
plans. The committee encourages the Department of Defense to
use IT systems that improve the sharing of data and the
efficiency of decision-making across organizations.
Subtitle B--Counterdrug Activities
Codification and expansion of authority for joint task forces of the
Department of Defense to support law enforcement agencies
conducting counter-terrorism, counter-illicit trafficking, or
counter-transnational organized crime activities (sec. 1011)
The committee recommends a provision that would codify in
title 10, United States Code, the authority of section 1022 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004
(Public Law 108-136), as amended, for the Secretary of Defense
to use funds for counter-drug activities to enable joint task
forces that support law enforcement agencies engaged in
counter-drug activities to also support law enforcement
activities for countering terrorism and countering
transnational criminal organizations. The provision would also
clarify that Department of Defense support that may be provided
under this section would be available for law enforcement
activities for countering illicit trafficking, whether
conducted by a transnational criminal organization or a state
actor.
Extension of authority to support a unified counterdrug and
counterterrorism campaign in Colombia (sec. 1012)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
through fiscal year 2023 the authority under section 1021 of
the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375), as most recently amended
by section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92), to support Colombia's
unified counterdrug and counterterrorism campaign.
Subtitle C--Naval Vessels
Modification to annual naval vessel construction plan (sec. 1021)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
inclusion of naval vessel expected service lives in the annual
naval vessel construction plan.
Navy battle force ship assessment and requirement reporting (sec. 1022)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
Navy battle force ship assessment and requirement reporting
when a covered event occurs.
Subtitle D--Counterterrorism
Extension of prohibition on use of funds for transfer or release of
individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba, to the United States (sec. 1031)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
through December 31, 2022, the prohibition on the use of funds
provided to the Department of Defense to transfer or release
individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba, to the United States.
Extension of prohibition on use of funds to construct or modify
facilities in the United States to house detainees transferred
from United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec.
1032)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
until December 31, 2022, the prohibition on the use of funds
provided to the Department of Defense to construct or modify
facilities in the United States to house detainees transferred
from United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Extension of prohibition on use of funds for transfer or release of
individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba, to certain countries (sec. 1033)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
through December 31, 2022, the prohibition on the use of funds
provided to the Department of Defense to transfer or release
individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba, to Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen.
Extension of prohibition on use of funds to close or relinquish control
of United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec.
1034)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
through the end of fiscal year 2022 the prohibition on the use
of funds provided to the Department of Defense to: (1) Close or
abandon United States Naval Station, Guantanamo; (2) Relinquish
control of Guantanamo Bay to the Republic of Cuba; or (3)
Implement a material modification to the Treaty between the
United States of America and Cuba signed at Washington, D.C.,
on May 29, 1934, which modification would constructively close
United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Report on medical care provided to detainees at United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec. 1035)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Chief Medical Officer of the United States Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay, to submit, not later than 120 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, a detailed report to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the provision of medical care to detainees
at Guantanamo. The report is to be submitted in classified
form.
Subtitle E--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations
Notification of significant Army force structure changes (sec. 1041)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense or Secretary of the Army to notify the
congressional defense committees of plans to make significant
changes to Army force structure, including the establishment or
stationing of new or experimental units of significance.
The committee supports Army efforts to modernize and
reorganize for competition and, if necessary, conflict with
strategic competitors. Given the critical role that Army forces
serve in all theaters of operation, the Congress has an
inherent oversight responsibility with respect to the size of
the Army, Army force structure, and its capability and capacity
to meet the requirements of the National Defense Strategy.
Extension of admission to Guam or the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands for certain nonimmigrant H-2B workers (sec.
1042)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 6(b)(1)(B) of the Joint Resolution titled ``A Joint
Resolution to approve the `Covenant to Establish a Commonwealth
of the Northern Mariana Islands in Political Union with the
United States of America', and for other purposes'' (48 U.S.C.
1806(b)(1)(B)), approved March 24, 1976, by extending the
deadline for certain non-immigrant H-2B workers. The committee
notes that this provision would support the realignment of U.S.
forces to Guam by addressing limited workforce availability on
Guam.
Subtitle F--Studies and Reports
Report on implementation of irregular warfare strategy (sec. 1051)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense
committees, not later than 180 days after the date of enactment
of this Act and annually through fiscal year 2027, a report on
the activities and programs of the Department of Defense to
implement the irregular warfare strategy consistent with the
2019 Irregular Warfare Annex to the National Defense Strategy.
Optimization of Irregular Warfare Technical Support Directorate (sec.
1052)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low
Intensity Conflict, in coordination with the Under Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering, the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, and the service
secretaries, to submit a plan to improve the Irregular Warfare
Technical Support Directorate's (IWTSD) support to military
requirements and a Department of Defense Instruction to better
define the IWTSD's role in the Department of Defense research,
development, and acquisition enterprise.
The committee notes that section 264 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92) directed an independent study by a federally funded
research and development center on optimizing resources
allocated to the Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office,
which was renamed the IWTSD in November 2020. The independent
study made a number of recommendations to improve the
effectiveness and efficiency of the IWTSD, which are reflected
in the recommended provision.
Quarterly briefings on anomalous health incidents (sec. 1053)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act and every 90 days thereafter for 2
years, to provide the congressional defense committees a
briefing on Department of Defense (DOD) efforts to address
anomalous health incidents.
The committee notes that, since at least 2016, U.S.
Government personnel have reported anomalous health incidents
at diplomatic missions across the world. Some of those impacted
by such incidents are facing permanent, life-altering effects
that have disrupted lives and ended careers.
The committee believes anomalous health incidents are a
matter of urgent concern and deserve the full attention of the
U.S. Government. In particular, personnel afflicted by such
anomalous health incidents deserve equitable, accessible, and
high-quality medical assessment and care, regardless of their
employing agency. Furthermore, information sharing and
interagency coordination is essential for the comprehensive
investigation, attribution, and mitigation of such incidents in
the future. To that end, the committee urges the President to
designate an appropriate senior administration official to lead
an interagency working group for the purposes of coordinating
the U.S. Government response to anomalous health incidents.
Additionally, the committee believes that relevant
departments and agencies should seek to provide the Congress
and the American public with informative and, to the extent
possible, unclassified updates on anomalous health incidents
and the threat posed to U.S. Government personnel. The
committee is concerned that at-risk U.S. Government personnel
have not been adequately informed about this threat, due in
part to a lack of internal workforce guidance across Federal
agencies. Therefore, the committee urges the Secretary of
Defense to ensure appropriate guidance is developed and
disseminated to civilian and uniformed personnel on the threat,
known defensive measures, and processes to report suspected
incidents. Lastly, the committee believes the perpetrators of
attacks on U.S. Government personnel that result in anomalous
health incidents should be publicly identified and held
accountable.
Given the seriousness and urgency associated with this
threat, not later than October 15, 2021, the committee directs
the Secretary of Defense to provide the congressional defense
committees a briefing on DOD efforts to address anomalous
health incidents. At a minimum, the briefing shall include:
(1) An explanation of DOD efforts to investigate,
attribute, and mitigate the cause of anomalous health
incidents, including any additional resources or
authorities needed to enhance such efforts;
(2) A description of the process used to ensure
timely assessment and treatment of U.S. Government
personnel that have suffered from an anomalous health
incident, including any additional resources or
authorities necessary to ensure adequate care for such
personnel and their families;
(3) An articulation of efforts to improve training of
personnel most at risk of experiencing anomalous health
incidents and to encourage reporting of such incidents
when they occur;
(4) Any other matters deemed relevant by the
Secretary.
Subtitle G--Other Matters
Commission on the National Defense Strategy (sec. 1061)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish a
Commission on the National Defense Strategy (NDS), which would
be tasked with providing an independent review and assessment
of the forthcoming NDS. The provision would replicate the same
structure of the last NDS commission with minor changes.
The 2018 Commission on the National Defense Strategy, which
was authorized by the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328), has been a crucial
resource for this committee. Specifically, the commission's
report, ``Providing for the Common Defense,'' provided
bipartisan and independent analysis that has aided the
committee as it conducts oversight of the NDS issued in 2018.
Furthermore, the commission's work identified additional policy
areas that required attention from senior leadership within the
Department of Defense, including the development of new
operational concepts and the need to reinvigorate civil-
military relations.
In addition, the provision would authorize the commission
to draw on an independent, non-governmental institution to
augment the analytical capability available to the commission.
The committee notes the use of the United States Institute of
Peace as a coordinating agent of commission reports over the
last decade. In selecting a potential facilitator for the
commission under this provision, the Department should give
full consideration to the past performance of independent
entities and relevant expertise in national security and
military affairs.
Finally, in light of the valuable contribution of the
previous commission, the committee expects the Department to
fully cooperate with the commission that would be established
under this provision during its review of the next NDS and
ensure it has the support necessary to fulfill its mandate.
Assessment of requirements for and management of Army three-dimensional
terrain data (sec. 1062)
The committee recommends a provision that would require an
assessment of joint force requirements for three-dimensional
(3D) terrain data to achieve Combined Joint All-Domain Command
and Control, a determination of whether One World Terrain 3D
geospatial data meets requirements for precision targeting, and
a determination of the optimum management and funding structure
for 3D terrain data. The provision would also require the Vice
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Under Secretary of
Defense for Intelligence and Security, and the Secretary of the
Army to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees not later than 180 days after the enactment of this
Act on the assessment and determinations.
Modification to Regional Centers for Security Studies (sec. 1063)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 342(b)(2) and section 2611(a)(2) of title 10, United
States Code, related to regional centers for security studies.
The committee notes that section 1089 of the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (Public Law 116-283) directed the Secretary of Defense to
submit to the congressional defense committees a plan to
establish a Department of Defense Regional Center for Security
Studies for the Arctic, also known as the Ted Stevens Center
for Arctic Security Studies, and, not earlier than 30 days
after the submission of such plan and subject to the
availability of appropriations, authorized the Secretary to
establish and administer the Center. The committee notes that
the Secretary made a determination in 2021 to establish the Ted
Stevens Center for Arctic Security Studies. The committee
believes the authority pursuant to subsection (b) of section
1089, specifically the authority of the Secretary to establish
and administer such a Center, includes the authority to hire or
appoint personnel necessary to establish and administer the
Center in a timely manner, to include the hiring or appointment
of an interim Director.
Items of Special Interest
Access to Sensitive Compartmented Information
The committee notes that, under current Senate policy,
members of a Senator's personal staff are not eligible for
access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI). The
committee believes that access to highly classified information
is an important part of fulfilling a Senator's legislative and
oversight responsibilities. Accordingly, the committee
recommends that the Office of Senate Security review the Senate
Security Manual and consider revisions that would allow one
member of each Senator's personal office to be granted access
to SCI and establish procedures and arrangements with executive
branch departments and agencies to conduct these personnel
security clearance investigations and adjudications.
Appreciation for Department of Defense response to the coronavirus
pandemic
The committee expresses its deep condolences for the tragic
loss of hundreds of thousands of American lives due to the
devastating impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. This deadly
disease profoundly affected our lives as individuals, as a
Nation, and as part of the international community.
The committee expresses its sincere appreciation for the
Department of Defense's (DOD) significant contributions to the
response to COVID-19. As part of this response, over 47,000
National Guard members mobilized to staff testing centers,
deliver food, and provide medical and vaccination support. The
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers constructed 38 new alternate care
facilities, adding over 17,000 hospital beds to handle the
surge in patients. DOD personnel assigned to the
Countermeasures Acceleration Group (CAG), formerly known as
Operation Warp Speed, and General Gustave F. Perna, who
provided critical leadership of that group, worked with the
private sector to scale up the research, development, testing,
production, and distribution of vaccines throughout the entire
U.S. population.
By supporting the production of COVID-19 vaccines and
expediting their distribution, the CAG's unprecedented efforts
were critical to ensuring that more than 370 million COVID-19
vaccine doses were distributed within 6 months of the vaccines'
emergency use authorizations, saving many thousands of American
lives. Indeed, as of June 2021, more than half of all American
adults were fully vaccinated, including more than 75 percent of
all senior citizens. From the peak of the pandemic in early
January 2021 through mid-June 2021, COVID-19 case numbers
dropped by nearly 95 percent nationwide.
The committee recognizes the efforts of the U.S. Army
Contracting Command and the Joint Program Office for Chemical,
Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Defense (JPEO-CBRND),
which procured the vaccines that are now being administered
across the United States.
The committee further recognizes that there is still more
work to be done, including inoculating more Americans,
responding to viral variants, and helping other nations
suppress the virus. Nevertheless, due to the efforts of the
Department and, in particular, the CAG significant progress has
been made and Americans are beginning to return to more
familiar daily routines.
The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to
appropriately and fully recognize the extraordinary
contributions of the personnel of the Department of Defense to
the COVID-19 response, including the National Guard, the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, the Army Contracting Command, the
JPEO-CBRND, the personnel assigned to the CAG, and General
Perna for his leadership of that group.
Arctic weather observations
The committee notes that the 2020 Air Force Arctic Strategy
highlighted that domain awareness can be improved by expanding
environmental observations in areas of sparse coverage. To
achieve this in a cost-effective manner in the domestic Arctic,
the committee strongly encourages the Air Force to join the
interagency efforts to enhance and sustain observation of long-
term environmental changes with the Arctic Observing Network-
USArray network partnership.
Assessment of hostile respiratory diseases
The committee is concerned about the potential threat from
adversaries seeking to use respiratory diseases in an effort to
harm servicemembers and civilians. Weaponized respiratory
diseases are effective at low dosage, have a short incubation
period in a population of low immunity, are difficult to treat,
can easily be produced in bulk, are stable in terms of storage,
and are easily disseminated. Some examples that are frequently
mentioned include smallpox, tularemia, pneumonic plague, and
coronaviruses. Additionally, clustered regularly interspaced
short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) gene-editing technology has
been available since 2012 and can be used to edit DNA in order
to enhance the infectivity or lethality of viruses, making
viruses such as influenza potential weapons as well.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees
not later than March 31, 2022. The briefing shall focus on the
threats associated with the weaponization of respiratory
diseases in an attempt to cause serious harm to servicemembers
and their families, both at home and abroad, and the role of
the Department of Defense in responding to such threats.
Assessment of hostile use of zoonotic diseases
The committee is concerned about the potential threat from
adversaries seeking to use foot-and-mouth disease or other
zoonotic diseases in an effort to disrupt the food supply and
harm servicemembers and civilians. The committee notes that the
Army's Veterinary Corps, which is one the Nation's largest
provider of veterinarians to agencies such as the Department of
Agriculture in an emergency, is responsible for maintaining
food safety and animal control at all Department of Defense
bases. In some overseas locations, the Veterinary Corps
conducts regular sampling of food and water for monitoring and
detection of the intentional introduction of diseases.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture and the
Secretary of Homeland Security, to provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees, not later than March 31,
2022. The briefing shall focus on the threats associated with
the intentional introduction of foot-and-mouth disease, or
other zoonotic or biological pathogens, into the food supply,
in an attempt to cause serious harm to servicemembers and their
families, both at home and abroad, and the role of the
Department of Defense in responding to such threats.
Assessment of missile salvo defense capabilities and capacity
The committee remains concerned about the threat of high-
volume missile salvo attacks on Joint force critical fixed
sites and high-value assets. Complex, high-volume, advanced
missiles salvo attacks are one of the greatest threats to U.S.
military forces. Strategic competitors are aggressively
investing in advanced ballistic, supersonic, and hypersonic
missiles and continue to expand their already large stockpiles
of these munitions.
The committee directs the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff, in coordination with the military service chiefs and
the Commanders of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) and
U.S. European Command (EUCOM), to conduct an assessment of
Joint force capability and capacity to defend against
anticipated complex, high-volume, advanced missiles salvo
attacks. The assessment shall be based on a fully informed
threat assessment of strategic competitor current and emerging
advanced missiles of anticipated types, numbers, and concepts
of employment against critical fixed sites, and high-value
land-based and naval assets.
Joint force capabilities to be considered in the assessment
shall include current and developmental missile defense systems
and advanced emerging capabilities including the hypervelocity
gun weapon systems, electronic warfare systems, and directed
energy. The assessment shall analyze specific cases in both the
INDOPACOM and EUCOM theaters of operation in the context of the
emerging global Joint Warfighting Concept and the respective
theater's Joint operational concept. The Vice Chairman shall
provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee on
the assumptions, conduct, and conclusions of the assessment not
later than January 15, 2022.
Comparative assessment of naval shipbuilding costs
The committee believes that one aspect of defense strategy
implementation is a detailed understanding of the relative
purchasing power for similar weapons systems among the great
power competitors. To this end, the committee desires a better
understanding of the comparative costs of naval shipbuilding in
the United States, China, and Russia.
Therefore the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
to submit, not later than March 1, 2022, a report to the
congressional defense committees on the comparative costs of
naval shipbuilding in the United States, China, and Russia. The
report shall include a comparison of the following costs in the
United States, China, and Russia:
(1) The approximate end cost to construct an aircraft
carrier, attack submarine, ballistic missile submarine,
large surface combatant, small surface combatant, and
amphibious ship. For each category of vessel, a
description of the key quantitative and qualitative
differences of the vessels being assessed with
associated cost implications shall be included;
(2) The approximate cost of key commodities used in
naval shipbuilding, including one ton of steel;
(3) The approximate cost of key labor resources used
in naval shipbuilding, including one production labor
hour, one electrician labor hour, and one design labor
hour;
(4) The approximate cost of key combat subsystems
used in naval vessels, including air and missile
defense radars, electronic warfare suites, anti-
submarine capabilities, and shipboard combat system
software. For each category of subsystem, a description
of the key quantitative and qualitative differences of
the subsystems being assessed with associated cost
implications shall be included;
(5) The approximate cost of key hull, mechanical, and
electric subsystems used in naval vessels, including
main engines, electrical generators, shafting, and air
conditioning systems. For each category of subsystem, a
description of the key quantitative and qualitative
differences of the subsystems being assessed with
associated cost implications shall be included; and
(6) Other cost drivers in naval shipbuilding, as
identified by the Secretary, with the associated costs.
The report shall be submitted in unclassified form and may
include a classified annex.
Maritime domain information sharing
The committee understands that the Department of Defense
may possess maritime and oceanographic information that may be
useful to other executive branch agencies. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report
to the congressional defense committees, not later than April
1, 2022, on the extent to which: (1) The Department is sharing
maritime domain awareness and oceanographic information with
other executive branch agencies; (2) There are additional
opportunities to share such information, including on a routine
basis; and (3) The Congress could provide additional
authorities to allow greater sharing of information.
Navy capabilities in the Arctic region
In the January 2021 strategic blueprint for the Arctic,
titled ``A Blue Arctic,'' the Department of the Navy noted,
``Without sustained American naval presence and partnerships in
the Arctic Region, peace and prosperity will be increasingly
challenged by Russia and China, whose interests and values
differ dramatically from ours.''
The committee therefore directs the Secretary of the Navy
to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee on
the capabilities of the Navy in the Arctic region not later
than December 1, 2021. The briefing should include: (1) An
analysis of the naval capabilities of the Department of Defense
in the Arctic, with a particular emphasis on surface
capabilities; (2) An analysis of any gaps that exist between
the Navy's existing capabilities and the ability of the
Department to fully execute its strategy for the Arctic region;
(3) An analysis of any gaps in existing naval capabilities that
require ice-hardening of existing vessels or the construction
of new vessels to preserve freedom of navigation in the Arctic
region; (4) An analysis and recommendation regarding which
naval vessels could be ice-hardened to effectively preserve
freedom of navigation in the Arctic region, where necessary;
and (5) An analysis, with particular focus on Navy surface
ships undergoing design, of the cost increases or schedule
adjustments that may result from ice-hardening naval vessels.
Navy surface warfare training
The committee continues to believe that the Navy should
replace the six YP-676 class yard patrol (YP) craft slated for
disposal with upgraded YP-703 class craft that incorporate
modernization, training, and habitability improvements in order
to increase training opportunities for surface warfare officer
candidates from all accession sources. Accordingly, the
committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to release a request
for proposals for the detail design and construction of
upgraded YP-703 class craft not later than fiscal year 2023.
Additionally, the committee believes that significant
training value may be derived through establishing surface
warfare training squadrons in fleet concentration areas on the
East and West Coasts. Accordingly, the committee directs the
Secretary of the Navy to submit to the congressional defense
committees, not later than February 1, 2022, a report comparing
potential costs and benefits of establishing such training
squadrons in Norfolk, Virginia, and San Diego, California. This
report shall include the following elements:
(1) An overview of current methods for training
surface warfare officers and sailors in shiphandling,
navigation, and seamanship skills, with particular
focus on the current balance between simulated and
real-world experiences during individual (e.g., Basic
and Advanced Division Officer Courses), basic,
intermediate, and advanced training phases;
(2) An analysis of the advantages and limitations of
the Navy's current preference for simulators for formal
training courses in shiphandling, navigation, and
seamanship skills;
(3) A cost estimate, including procurement,
operations, and maintenance costs, for each of the
following options for increasing real-world experience
during surface warfare officer training:
(a) re-designating warships scheduled for
decommissioning as training vessels;
(b) shifting some YP craft from Annapolis,
Maryland, to Norfolk, Virginia, and San Diego,
California; and
(c) new platforms designed specifically to
serve as training vessels.
(4) A cost estimate for establishing one or more
training squadrons dedicated to providing shiphandling,
navigation, and seamanship training for each of the
options described in (3)(a), (3)(b), and (3)(c); and
(5) Recommendations on how to improve the balance
between simulated and real-world training evolutions
during the various surface warfare training phases.
Overseas contingency operations budget exhibits
The committee notes that the Department of Defense (DOD)
did not include the Overseas Contingency Operations account in
the budget request for fiscal year 2022 and instead requested
funding for direct and enduring war-related costs in the base
budget. This resulted in difficulties in preparing the annual
congressional justification books due to uncertainty regarding
the presentation of funding lines previously delivered in the
Overseas Contingency Operations budget. The inclusion of both
direct and enduring war-related costs organized by
appropriation account in the justification books does not
provide the Congress and the public with the appropriate level
of detail and transparency regarding war-related costs.
Therefore, the committee encourages the Under Secretary of
Defense (Comptroller) to provide separate budget exhibits for
direct war-related costs and for enduring war-related costs,
not separated by appropriations account, as the Department of
Defense prepares the budget request for fiscal year 2023.
TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS
Civilian personnel management (sec. 1101)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 129 of title 10, United States Code, to make technical
clarifications concerning the management of civilian personnel
of the Department of Defense.
Consideration of employee performance in reductions in force for
civilian positions in the Department of Defense (sec. 1102)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1597 of title 10, United States Code, to require that
employee performance be among the factors considered by the
Department of Defense in the case of employee reductions,
rather than the primary factor.
Enhancement of recusal for conflicts of personal interest requirements
for Department of Defense officers and employees (sec. 1103)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
Department of Defense officers and employees from participating
personally and substantially in matters that the officer or
employee knows, or reasonably should know, is likely to have a
direct and predictable effect on the financial interests of (1)
Any organization for which the officer or employee has served
in the past 4 years; (2) A former direct competitor or client
of any organization for which the officer or employee has
served in the past 4 years; or (3) Any employer with whom the
officer or employee is seeking employment.
Authority to employ civilian faculty members at the Defense Institute
of International Legal Studies (sec. 1104)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1595 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
Secretary of Defense to employ and pay faculty at the Defense
Institute of International Legal Studies as the Secretary
considers necessary.
Extension of temporary increase in maximum amount of voluntary
separation incentive pay authorized for civilian employees of
the Department of Defense (sec. 1105)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1107 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to extend the temporary
increase in the maximum amount of voluntary separation
incentive pay authorized to be paid to civilian employees of
the Department of Defense.
One-year extension of temporary authority to grant allowances,
benefits, and gratuities to civilian personnel on official duty
in a combat zone (sec. 1106)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend by 1
year the discretionary authority of the head of a Federal
agency to provide allowances, benefits, and gratuities
comparable to those provided to members of the Foreign Service
to the agency's civilian employees on official duty in a combat
zone.
One-year extension of authority to waive annual limitation on premium
pay and aggregate limitation on pay for Federal civilian
employees working overseas (sec. 1107)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1101 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), as
most recently amended by section 1105 of the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (Public Law 116-283), to extend through 2022 the authority
of heads of executive agencies to waive the limitation on the
aggregate of basic and premium pay of employees who perform
work in an overseas location that is in the area of
responsibility of the Commander, U.S. Central Command
(CENTCOM), or in a location that was formerly in CENTCOM but
has been moved to the area of responsibility of the Commander,
U.S. Africa Command, in support of a military operation or an
operation in response to a declared emergency.
Pilot program on direct hire authority for spouses of members of the
uniformed services at locations outside the United States (sec.
1108)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to conduct a pilot program to appoint,
without regard to the provisions of subchapter I of chapter 33
of title 5, United States Code (other than sections 3303 and
3328 of such chapter), certain dependents of members of the
uniformed services stationed at a duty station outside of the
United States to a competitive position within the Department
of Defense.
Civilian Cybersecurity Reserve pilot project at United States Cyber
Command (sec. 1109)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, to conduct a temporary pilot
program establishing a civilian cybersecurity reserve, to
include the exercise of alternative employment authority, not
subject to the Office of Personnel Management, to establish
qualification requirements for, recruitment of, and appointment
to positions, and classifying positions.
Items of Special Interest
Limiting the number of local wage areas defined within a pay locality
The committee notes that the Office of Personnel Management
(OPM) is responsible for overseeing the implementation and
administration of the Federal Wage System (FWS) in consultation
with other agencies, appropriate labor organizations, and the
advice of the Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee
(FPRAC). Since 2010, the FPRAC has voted three times to
recommend that OPM align FWS wage areas with General Schedule
locality pay areas across the country. OPM has not implemented
these recommendations. The committee encourages the
administration and OPM to address this longstanding issue as
soon as possible.
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS
Subtitle A--Assistance and Training
Authority to build capacity for additional operations (sec. 1201)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
authority under section 333 of title 10, United States Code, to
clarify that the purposes for which security assistance may be
provided include building the capacity of foreign national
security forces to conduct counter-illicit trafficking
operations.
The committee notes the potential impact of extreme weather
and changing environmental conditions on building and
sustaining partner capacity and encourages the Department of
Defense to take environmental resiliency into consideration in
the development and execution of small-scale construction
programs under the section 333 authority.
Administrative support and payment of certain expenses for covered
foreign defense personnel (sec. 1202)
The committee recommends a provision that would add a new
section 334 to title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
Secretary of Defense to provide administrative services and
support to foreign personnel assigned to the United Nations
Command in the Republic of Korea.
Authority for certain reimbursable interchange of supplies and services
(sec. 1203)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 2571 of title 10, United States Code, for purposes of
providing assistance to a foreign partner under certain
specified security cooperation authorities. Existing law under
section 2571 allows a department or organization within the
Department of Defense (DOD) to perform work or services for, or
furnish supplies to, any other DOD department or organization,
without reimbursement or transfer of funds. The provision would
allow for the interchange of supplies and services under
section 2571 with reimbursement for purposes of providing
assistance to a foreign partner pursuant to section 333 or
section 345 of title 10, United States Code, and such a
reimbursable order would be deemed an obligation in the same
manner as an order placed under section 6307 of title 41,
United States Code.
Extension and modification of Department of Defense support for
stabilization activities in national security interest of the
United States (sec. 1204)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
through December 31, 2023, the authority under section 1210A of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116-92) for Department of Defense support to
stabilization activities in the national security interest of
the United States. The provision would also modify the section
1210A authority to allow the Department of Defense to provide
support to stabilization activities in countries or regions
that were prioritized under the Global Fragility Act of 2019.
Temporary authority to pay for personnel expenses of foreign national
security forces participating in the training program of the
United States-Colombia Action Plan for Regional Security (sec.
1205)
The committee recommends a provision that would
temporarily, for fiscal year 2022, authorize the Secretary of
Defense to pay the personnel expenses of foreign national
security forces to participate in the training program of the
United States-Colombia Action Plan (USCAP) for Regional
Security conducted at institutions in Colombia.
The committee notes that the USCAP for Regional Security
has contributed to U.S. national security interests by building
the capacity of friendly foreign security forces to conduct
missions for countering transnational criminal organizations.
By covering the costs for foreign security forces to attend
Colombian training programs, the Department of Defense is able
to leverage these partner institutions to certify the
capabilities of third country forces at lower cost than if the
United States were undertaking the training of these forces
itself.
The Commander, U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), has
indicated that the Department of Defense currently lacks a
permanent authority to pay the expenses of foreign security
forces to attend training programs at non-U.S. institutions.
While this provision would temporarily address this gap for the
USCAP, the committee urges the Department to consult with the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on how to address this situation in the
SOUTHCOM area and potentially in other geographic combatant
commands as well.
Security cooperation strategy for certain combatant commands (sec.
1206)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of
State, to develop and implement security cooperation strategies
for each geographic combatant command. Each security
cooperation strategy would include: (1) A statement of
strategic objectives; (2) The primary lines of effort of the
combatant command; (3) The key authorities of the Department of
Defense (DOD) used for each line of effort; (4) The
institutional capacity-building programs and activities within
the combatant command; and (5) A description of how the
development, planning, and implementation of DOD security
cooperation programs are being coordinated and deconflicted
with the security assistance authorities of the Department of
State and other civilian agencies. The initial security
cooperation strategies would be submitted to the appropriate
committees of the Congress 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, and then submitted annually through
2027, concurrently with the report required pursuant to section
386(a) of title 10, United States Code.
Plan for enhancing Western Hemisphere security cooperation (sec. 1207)
The committee recommends a provision that would require,
not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, that the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the
Secretary of State, submit to the appropriate committees of the
Congress a detailed plan for enhancing security cooperation in
the Western Hemisphere.
Pilot program to support the implementation of the Women, Peace, and
Security Act of 2017 (sec. 1208)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of
State, to carry out a pilot program to conduct assessments on
the barriers and opportunities with respect to strengthening
recruitment, employment, development, retention, and promotion
of women in the military forces of various partner countries
during the course of security assistance activities.
Limitation on support to military forces of the Kingdom of Morocco for
bilateral or multilateral exercises (sec. 1209)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the use of Department of Defense funds to support the
participation of the military forces of the Kingdom of Morocco
for bilateral or multilateral exercises, unless the Secretary
determines and certifies to the congressional defense
committees that the Kingdom of Morocco has taken steps to
support a final peace agreement with Western Sahara. The
provision would also include the authority for the Secretary to
waive the limitation, if such participation is determined to be
important to the national security interests of the United
States.
Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Afghanistan and Pakistan
Extension and modification of authority for support for reconciliation
activities led by the Government of Afghanistan and prohibition
on use of funds for the Taliban and other terrorist groups
(sec. 1211)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization for the Department of Defense to provide support
for Government of Afghanistan-led reconciliation activities.
The provision would modify the existing authority to allow for
covered support to be provided both inside Afghanistan and in
Afghanistan's near abroad if the Secretary of Defense
determined in coordination with the Secretary of State that it
was in the national security interests of the United States.
The provision modifies reporting with regards to the authority
to be initiated only if the covered support is provided.
Extension and modification of authority for reimbursement of certain
coalition nations for support provided to United States
military operations (sec. 1212)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authority for reimbursement of certain coalition nations for
support provided to U.S. military operations through December
31, 2022.
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (sec. 1213)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriation of funds for the Afghanistan Security Forces
Fund for fiscal year 2022. The committee believes that
continued support for the Afghan security forces, even beyond
the transition of United States and coalition nations from the
country, is vital to achieving stability and security in
Afghanistan and preventing another major terrorist attack
emanating from Afghanistan. The committee further recommends
that the Secretary of Defense report to the congressional
defense committees regarding plans for providing support to the
Afghan security forces once United States and coalition partner
nations transition from the country. In addition, the provision
would require that not more than $1.0 billion of the funds
authorized be expended until the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the heads of other appropriate agencies,
reports on certain metrics regarding the delivery of assistance
and that not more than $2.5 billion of assistance be expended
until indicators of progress are certified.
The committee notes its strong support for the Special
Immigrant Visa (SIV) program for Afghans and is concerned about
the safety and security of applicants once United States forces
transition from the country. The committee is further concerned
about ensuring the military has the capability to conduct
evacuations of Afghans who are vulnerable because of their
association with the United States if security conditions
deteriorate rapidly. The committee recommends that, if it is
determined to be necessary, the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretary of State, should have the
authority to provide transportation, security, and life
support, or to reimburse coalition or partner nations for the
provision of such support and services to certain Afghan
citizens and their dependents who have been targeted as a
result of their association with the United States or a
coalition partner.
Quarterly security briefings on Afghanistan (sec. 1214)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Under Secretary of Defense for Policy to provide quarterly
briefings on the security situation in Afghanistan and the
Department of Defense's efforts to counter terrorist groups
beginning not later than January 15, 2022.
Sense of Senate and briefing on counterterrorism posture of the United
States after transition of United States Armed Forces from
Afghanistan (sec. 1215)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of the Senate on the United States' presence in the
region after the transition of United States and coalition
forces from Afghanistan and would require the Secretary of
Defense to provide a briefing regarding additional
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance requirements in
order to continue to conduct counterterrorism operations beyond
September 11, 2021, by January 15, 2022.
Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Syria, Iraq, and Iran
Extension and modification of authority to provide assistance to vetted
Syrian groups and individuals (sec. 1221)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authority to provide assistance to vetted Syrian groups through
2022 under section 1209 of the Carl Levin and Howard P.
``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291), as amended. The provision would
also further streamline reporting by eliminating the
requirement upon meeting each 25 percent threshold expenditure
increment.
Extension and modification of authority to support operations and
activities of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq (sec.
1222)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization for the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq
through fiscal year 2022. The committee expects to see
continued progress on the Office of Security Cooperation in
Iraq's efforts to transition to a normalized security
cooperation office and directs the Department of Defense to
provide an update on progress in implementing this transition
before obligating or expending more than $10.0 million. The
committee notes the intent to transition to a normalized
security cooperation office is consistent with the decrease in
funding levels in fiscal years 2021 and 2022.
Extension and modification of authority to provide assistance to
counter the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (sec. 1223)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authority to provide assistance to Iraq to counter the Islamic
State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) through December 31, 2022. The
committee supports continued assistance to the Iraqi Security
Forces, including the Counter Terrorism Service (CTS) and the
Ministry of Peshmerga, in order to continue operations to
ensure the lasting defeat of ISIS.
Subtitle D--Matters Relating to Europe and the Russian Federation
Extension of limitation on military cooperation between the United
States and the Russian Federation (sec. 1231)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 1232(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to extend through fiscal
year 2022 the limitation on military cooperation between the
United States and the Russian Federation.
Extension of prohibition on availability of funds relating to
sovereignty of the Russian Federation over Crimea (sec. 1232)
The committee recommends a provision that would state that
none of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act for
fiscal year 2022 for the Department of Defense may be obligated
or expended to implement any activity that recognizes the
sovereignty of the Russian Federation over Crimea.
Extension of Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (sec. 1233)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
through December 31, 2024, the authority under section 1250 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016
(Public Law 114-92), as amended by section 1244 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92), for the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the
Secretary of State, to provide security assistance, including
defensive lethal assistance, and intelligence support to
military and other security forces of the Government of
Ukraine. The provision would authorize up to $300.0 million in
fiscal year 2022 to provide security assistance to Ukraine, of
which $75.0 million would be available only for lethal
assistance.
The committee continues to believe that defense
institutional reforms are critical to sustaining capabilities
developed using security assistance provided under this and
other authorities. Moreover, defense institutional reforms will
ultimately enable a more effective defense of Ukraine's
sovereignty and territorial integrity and allow Ukraine to
achieve its full potential as a strategic partner of the United
States. Therefore, the provision would prohibit the obligation
or expenditure of 50 percent of the funds authorized to be
appropriated in fiscal year 2022 under this authority until the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of
State, certifies that Ukraine has taken substantial action to
make defense institutional reforms.
The committee notes that Ukraine has significant organic
capabilities in its defense industrial base, which should be
leveraged and enhanced for the purposes of providing for
Ukraine's self-defense. The committee believes that, in
developing a program of security assistance for Ukraine, more
consideration should be given to striking the appropriate
balance between capabilities that are resident or could be
developed within Ukraine's organic industrial base and those
that are most appropriate for United States and other
multinational partners to provide. As such, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report by March
31, 2022, on the Department's approach to whether and how
consideration is given to the organic sourcing of defense
articles necessary for Ukraine's security via the Ukrainian
defense industrial base and, in those instances in which the
determination was made to provide United States-funded articles
for which there are the same or equivalent items resident in
the Ukrainian defense industrial base, the process and the
criteria by which such determinations were made.
Extension of authority for training for Eastern European national
security forces in the course of multilateral exercises (sec.
1234)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
through December 31, 2024, the authority provided in section
1251 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2016 (Public Law 114-92), as amended by section 1247 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public
Law 116-92), for the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence
of the Secretary of State, to provide multilateral or regional
training, and pay the incremental expenses of participating in
such training, for countries in Eastern Europe that: (1) Are
signatories to the Partnership for Peace Framework Documents
but not members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO); or (2) Became NATO members after January 1, 1999.
Sense of Senate on the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (sec. 1235)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of the Senate that the United States' commitment to the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization is ironclad and would
emphasize the importance of expanding cooperation on shared
security challenges.
Sense of Senate on continuing support for Estonia, Latvia, and
Lithuania (sec. 1236)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of the Senate that the United States should continue to
prioritize support for the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia,
and Lithuania as they build and invest in critical security
areas. The committee encourages the Department of Defense to
continue to assess whether any statutory changes, such as the
authorization of a Baltic Security Initiative, would be
advisable to address priority capability gaps.
Subtitle E--Matters Relating to the Indo-Pacific Region
Extension and modification of Indo-Pacific Maritime Security Initiative
(sec. 1241)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authority provided by section 1263 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92), as
amended, known as the Indo-Pacific Maritime Security
Initiative, through 2027. The provision would also make various
modifications to the authority intended to focus activities and
support provided under the authority on multilateral maritime
security cooperation and maritime domain awareness.
Extension and modification of Pacific Deterrence Initiative (sec. 1242)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
Pacific Deterrence Initiative (PDI), authorized by section 1251
of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283),
through fiscal year 2022.
The committee reiterates its strong support for the PDI as
means to prioritize Department of Defense efforts in support of
enhancing U.S. deterrence and defense posture, reassuring
allies and partners, and increasing readiness and capability in
the Indo-Pacific region, primarily west of the International
Date Line. The committee notes that the PDI budget request for
fiscal year 2022 was overly focused on platforms, including the
DDG-51, T-AO fleet oiler, and F-35, as opposed to improving the
joint posture and enabling capabilities necessary to enhance
deterrence in the Indo-Pacific region. The committee looks
forward to continuing to work with the Department of Defense to
ensure congressional intent is more appropriately reflected in
future budget requests.
Extension of authority to transfer funds for Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup
(sec. 1243)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authority of the Secretary of Defense to transfer up to $15.0
million to the Secretary of State for the Bien Hoa dioxin
cleanup in Vietnam through fiscal year 2022.
Cooperative program with Vietnam to account for Vietnamese personnel
missing in action (sec. 1244)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the heads of
other relevant Federal departments and agencies, to carry out a
cooperative program with the Government of Vietnam to assist in
accounting for Vietnamese personnel missing in action. The
authority to carry out such a program would expire on October
1, 2026.
Assessment of and plan for improving the defensive asymmetric
capabilities of Taiwan (sec. 1245)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the heads of other
relevant Federal departments and agencies, to provide the
appropriate committees of the Congress an assessment of
Taiwan's defensive asymmetric capabilities and a plan for
assisting Taiwan with the improvement of such capabilities.
Annual feasibility briefing on cooperation between the National Guard
and Taiwan (sec. 1246)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to provide the congressional defense
committees with an annual briefing on the feasibility and
advisability of enhanced cooperation between the National Guard
and Taiwan.
Defense of Taiwan (sec. 1247)
The committee recommends a provision that would state that
it shall be the policy of the United States to maintain the
ability of the United States Armed Forces to deny a fait
accompli against Taiwan in order to deter the People's Republic
of China from using military force to unilaterally change the
status quo with Taiwan.
Comparative analyses and report on efforts by the United States and the
People's Republic of China to advance critical modernization
technology with respect to military applications (sec. 1248)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to: (1)
Develop procedures to enable the Department of Defense to
establish comparative analysis capabilities; and (2) Complete a
comparative analysis assessment of critical modernization
technology in five specified areas.
The committee believes that development of critical
technologies with military applications is a key component of
strategic competition with China. Furthermore, the committee
believes that a comparative analysis of United States and
Chinese efforts to determine whether the United States has a
competitive advantage, or alternatively a competitive
disadvantage, as it relates to efforts of research,
development, and application of critical technologies for
military applications will help to underpin Department of
Defense efforts and investments in this critical dimension of
competition with China.
The committee notes the expertise of the Strategic
Intelligence Analysis Cell (SIAC) within the office of the
Deputy Director for Engineering in conducting technological
comparative analyses. The committee also believes the Office of
Net Assessment, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and
federally funded research development and engineering centers
have relevant experience and expertise to support this effort.
The committee understands there are cultural and
organizational constraints to the execution of such an analysis
and intends for the directed reports to be an initial effort in
what should be a longer-term effort of continuous evaluation.
The committee acknowledges the difficulty of fully
assessing such a comprehensive topic, but believes the value of
a comparative analysis to help inform future efforts is
critical to winning the strategic competition with China. The
committee recognizes in-depth comparative analysis may require
additional resources for proper execution over the longer term.
Modification of annual report on military and security developments
involving the People's Republic of China (sec. 1249)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
requirement for the Secretary of Defense to produce an annual
report on military and security developments involving the
People's Republic of China, established by section 1202(a) of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000
(Public Law 106-65), as amended, through January 31, 2027, and
streamline the elements of the required report.
Feasibility report on establishing more robust military-to-military
crisis communications with the People's Republic of China (sec.
1250)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the heads of other
relevant Federal departments and agencies, to provide the
appropriate committees of Congress a report, not later than 180
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, on the
feasibility and advisability of establishing more robust
military-to-military communications with China to enable clear
transmission of messages, avoid misunderstandings, reduce the
possibility of miscalculation, and manage potential escalation
in crisis situations.
Semiannual briefings on efforts to deter Chinese aggression and
military coercion (sec. 1251)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, not later than January 15, 2022, and
every 180 days thereafter through 2024, to provide a briefing
to the congressional defense committees on Department of
Defense (DOD) efforts to deter Chinese aggression and military
coercion.
The committee notes that the DOD announced a new directive
implementing the recommendations of the DOD China Task Force on
June 9, 2021. The committee supports changes by the Department
to better focus its efforts to counter Chinese aggression and
military coercion and more effectively contribute to the whole-
of-government strategy. The committee looks forward to working
collaboratively with the Department on these efforts.
Sense of Congress on defense alliances and partnerships in the Indo-
Pacific region (sec. 1252)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of the Congress on the importance of defense alliances
and partnerships in the Indo-Pacific region.
Subtitle F--Reports
Report on security cooperation authorities and associated resourcing in
support of the Security Force Assistance Brigades (sec. 1261)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit, not later than 90 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a
report assessing the adequacy of existing Department of Defense
security cooperation authorities and associated resources for
supporting the ability of the Army's Security Force Assistance
Brigades to meet the security cooperation requirements of the
combatant commands, and identifying any gaps in those
authorities or associated resourcing.
Independent assessment with respect to Arctic region and establishment
of Arctic Security Initiative (sec. 1262)
The committee recommends a provision that would require,
not later than February 15, 2022, an assessment with respect to
the activities and resources required to integrate and
implement the Department of Defense-wide and military service-
specific strategies with respect to the Arctic region. The
provision would also require the Secretary of Defense to submit
a plan for the establishment of an Arctic Security Initiative
(ASI) to support such strategies, and to establish an ASI not
later than fiscal year 2023.
Annual report and briefing on Global Force Management Allocation Plan
(sec. 1263)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to provide an annual classified report
summarizing the Global Force Management Allocation Plan for the
year in which the report is submitted. The provision would also
require an annual classified briefing describing the major
modifications to global force allocation for each fiscal year.
The provision would require the Secretary to submit the report
and provide the briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives not later than
October 31, 2022, and annually thereafter through 2024.
Subtitle G--Others Matters
Modification of United States-Israel Operations-Technology cooperation
within the United States-Israel Defense Acquisition Advisory
Group (sec. 1271)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1299M of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-
283) to require the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with
the Secretary of State, to take actions within the United
States-Israel Defense Acquisition Advisory Group to provide a
standing forum in which the United States and Israel can share
intelligence, identify military capability requirements common
to the Department of Defense and the Ministry of Defense of
Israel, assist defense suppliers in the United States and
Israel, develop combined United States-Israel plans for weapon
systems and military capabilities, and seek ways to broaden
Israeli cooperation with signatories to the Abraham Accords,
Egypt, and Jordan.
Prohibition on support for offensive military operations against the
Houthis in Yemen (sec. 1272)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
support for the Saudi-led coalition's offensive operations
against Ansar Allah, generally known as the Houthis, in Yemen,
including for coalition strikes, which is consistent with
President Biden's February 2021 announcement ending all
American support for offensive operations in the war in Yemen.
The committee also condemns Ansar Allah's destabilizing tactics
including the use of missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles
against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and their military assault
on Marib. The provision would ensure that the President
maintains the authority to support counterterrorism efforts in
Yemen by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, as well as
the authority to protect civilians, including United States
citizens, from attacks. The provision would also require a
report on the role of both Ansar Allah and Saudi Arabia in the
obstruction of humanitarian aid in Yemen.
Repeal of authorization of non-conventional assisted recovery
capabilities; modification of authority for expenditure of
funds for clandestine activities that support operational
preparation of the environment (sec. 1273)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal
section 943 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), as amended, on
December 31, 2022, and require a plan for transitioning the
funding for non-conventional assisted recovery capabilities to
the authority provided by section 127f of title 10, United
States Code, for activities that support operational
preparation of the environment.
The committee continues to support the requirement for non-
conventional assisted recovery activities by the geographic
combatant commands but believes the authority provided by
section 127f of title 10, United States Code, is more
appropriate for such purposes. Furthermore, the committee
believes a deliberate transition of such activities to a
standing title 10 authority will provide the Department of
Defense with more predictability and improve congressional
oversight of the range of activities contributing to
operational preparation of the environment. The committee
expects that regular reporting on non-conventional assisted
recovery activities will continue unchanged, including the
level of specificity required by section 943 of the Duncan
Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009.
Extension and modification of authority for certain payments to redress
injury and loss (sec. 1274)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
section 1213 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) through December 31, 2023,
and require the Secretary of Defense to establish procedures to
receive, evaluate, and respond to allegations of civilian harm
not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act.
As the Department of Defense works to establish such
procedures, the committee encourages the Secretary to continue
the past practice of robust engagement with nongovernmental
organizations that focus on addressing civilian harm in
conflict. The Secretary should also consider whether there is a
need for a federally funded research and development center to
study past practices and assess options for the U.S. response
to incidents of civilian harm.
Secretary of Defense Strategic Competition Initiative (sec. 1275)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
an initiative, to be known as the Secretary of Defense
Strategic Competition Initiative, that the Secretary of Defense
may use to fund Department of Defense (DOD) activities and
programs that advance U.S. national security objectives in the
strategic competition with near-peer rivals China and Russia.
The purpose of the initiative is to support DOD efforts to
compete at the strategic level across domains with near-peer
rivals, including emergent or unanticipated requirements;
counter coercion by near-peer rivals targeting U.S. allies and
partners in competition short of armed conflict; and integrate
with, support, and enable other Federal departments and
agencies to advance U.S. influence and interests.
The committee notes that elsewhere in this Act is a
recommended increase of $20.0 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-Wide, for the Office of the Secretary of
Defense for the Secretary of Defense Strategic Competition
Initiative.
Strategic competition initiative for United States Southern Command and
United States Africa Command (sec. 1276)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to develop and carry out an initiative
to support programs and activities for long-term strategic
competition with near-peer rivals the People's Republic of
China and the Russian Federation in the areas of responsibility
of U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) and U.S. Africa Command
(AFRICOM). The provision would require the Secretary of
Defense, in consultation with the Commanders of SOUTHCOM and
AFRICOM, to develop and submit to the congressional defense
committees a plan for the initiative. The initiative would be
implemented through the Department's security cooperation and
other existing authorities.
Modification of notification requirements for sensitive military
operations (sec. 1277)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
notification requirements for sensitive military operations
contained in section 130f of title 10, United States Code, to
include operations conducted by the Armed Forces to free an
individual from the control of hostile foreign forces.
The committee appreciates the Department of Defense's
efforts to refine and improve the process required for
notification of sensitive military operations to the Congress.
The committee intends to continue to work with the Department
to balance the need for timely and substantive notifications of
sensitive military operations with operational and personnel
limitations. The committee notes that sensitive military
operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria remain exempt from
the notification requirements under section 130f of title 10,
United States Code. However, given changes to the nature and
pace of operations and force levels in Afghanistan, Iraq, and
Syria, the committee believes that the Department should
provide notifications for significant sensitive military
operations in such countries that are consistent with the
requirements of 130f of title 10, United States Code. Examples
of significant sensitive military operations include those
intended to kill or capture high value individuals, to free
individuals from the control of hostile foreign forces, or high
operational tempo events to disrupt identified threats.
Special Operations Forces joint operating concept for competition and
conflict (sec. 1278)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low
Intensity Conflict and the Commander of U.S. Special Operations
Command to jointly submit to the congressional defense
committees a special operations forces joint operating concept
for competition and conflict not later than 180 days after the
date of enactment of this Act.
Plan for provision of information support to commanders of the
combatant commands (sec. 1279)
The committee recommends a provision that would require,
not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and
Security, in coordination with the Director of National
Intelligence, to develop a plan for more effectively fulfilling
the intelligence and information requirements of the combatant
commands in support of efforts to expose and counter foreign
malign influence, coercion, and subversion. The provision would
also require the Comptroller General of the United States,
within 45 days of the submission of the required plan, to
conduct an assessment of the sufficiency of the plan for
meeting the requirements of the combatant commands.
Independent review of and report on the Unified Command Plan (sec.
1280)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to provide for an independent review of
the current Unified Command Plan. The review shall consider
current and anticipated threats and an evaluation of the
missions and responsibilities of each geographic and functional
combatant command. The Secretary shall submit the review to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives not later than October 1, 2022.
Establishment of mission-oriented pilot programs to close significant
capabilities gaps (sec. 1281)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish, within the Strategic
Capabilities Office, mission integration pilot programs with
the objective of closing significant capabilities gaps by
synchronizing and integrating missions across services and
Field agencies. The pilot programs would be aligned to high
importance operational challenges for U.S. European Command and
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command and would be designed to leverage
industry cost sharing, including private equity and venture
capital, to develop underlying technology and overall
capability for delivery to the joint force within 5 years. The
provision would require the head of the Strategic Capabilities
Office to provide reports every 180 days, beginning 10 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act, to the
congressional defense committees on the pilot programs.
Finally, the provision would require the Secretary of Defense
to submit a recommendation to the congressional defense
committees with respect to continuing or expanding the pilot
program not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment
of this Act and would allow the Secretary to transition
responsibility for the pilot programs to another organization
beginning in fiscal year 2025.
Limitation on availability of certain funding for operation and
maintenance (sec. 1282)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the obligation or expenditure of more than 75 percent of the
funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act for the Office
of the Secretary of Defense until 15 days after the Secretary
submits the following to the congressional defense committees:
(1) The report on the comprehensive Department of
Defense policy on collective self-defense required by
section 1754 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92);
(2) The first quarterly report on Department of
Defense Execute Orders required by section 1744 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2020; and
(3) The report on the policy of the Department of
Defense relating to civilian casualties resulting from
U.S. military operations required by section 936 of the
John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232).
Items of Special Interest
Assessment of China-Russia Security Cooperation
The committee directs the Director of the Defense
Intelligence Agency, in coordination with the heads of other
relevant Federal departments and agencies, to complete a
qualitative and, to the degree practicable, a quantitative
assessment of the extent to which China and Russia have engaged
in security cooperation over the last five years.
Additionally, the committee directs the Director of the
Defense Intelligence Agency to provide the congressional
defense and intelligence committees a briefing on the results
of the required assessment not later than April 1, 2022. At a
minimum, the required briefing shall include an analysis of:
(1) The size and duration of combined military
exercises involving both Chinese and Russian forces;
(2) Sales of arms and provision of military services
between China and Russia;
(3) Exchanges of military personnel or attendance at
professional education courses or training facilities;
(4) Cooperative research and development on
technologies with military applications;
(5) Defense planning at the strategic, operational,
or tactical level;
(6) The results of any security dialogues or
agreements, including any notable changes in
information sharing or troop posture;
(7) The expected general trajectory of security
cooperation between China and Russia over the next five
years and the objectives of such security cooperation
for each nation; and
(8) Any other matters the Director deems appropriate.
Briefing on efforts to provide credible options to respond to the use
of force by China to alter the status quo with respect to
Taiwan
The committee believes that the Department of Defense has
appropriately identified China as the pacing threat for the
U.S. military. The committee also believes the U.S. military
should be appropriately postured and possess capabilities
required to deter and, if necessary, respond to the use of
force by China to alter the status quo with respect to Taiwan,
including to prevent a so-called ``fait accompli'' scenario.
Given the rapid pace of Chinese investment in advanced military
technology and technology with significant military
applications, the Department of Defense must develop and field
the capabilities necessary to maintain a qualitative edge with
respect to China, deter aggression, and provide credible
response options in the event of a contingency with respect to
Taiwan.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
not later than October 1, 2021, to provide the congressional
defense committees a briefing on Department of Defense efforts
to deter and, if necessary, provide the President with credible
options to respond to the use of force by China to alter the
status quo with respect to Taiwan. At a minimum, the briefing
shall include:
(1) An explanation of current U.S. military force
posture in the Indo-Pacific region west of the
International Date Line and planned enhancements that
will improve the resilience of U.S. forces to Chinese
aggression, including through dispersal and
disaggregation, while preserving options to respond;
(2) An evaluation of the adequacy of the combat
capability and capacity of extant and planned major
U.S. weapons system platforms to compete against
current and anticipated Chinese weapons systems between
now and 2035;
(3) An assessment of the current logistics
capabilities and capacities that identifies any gaps or
vulnerabilities, including in the areas of:
(a) pre-positioned forward stocks of
munitions;
(b) pre-positioned forward stocks of fuel as
well as storage and distribution;
(c) distributed maintenance; and
(d) logistics command and control; and
(4) Any other matters the Secretary deems
appropriate.
Comptroller General review of European Deterrence Initiative
The committee remains strongly in support of the objectives
of the European Deterrence Initiative (EDI), which include:
enhancing the United States' deterrence posture, increasing the
readiness and responsiveness of U.S. forces in Europe,
supporting the collective defense and security of North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies, and bolstering the
security and capacity of U.S. allies and partners. The
committee notes that it has been 7 years since the EDI was
first proposed and believes it is appropriate to review the
Initiative's progress in fulfilling its mission and
programmatic objectives. Therefore, the committee directs the
Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a review of
the EDI. At a minimum, the review should:
(1) Outline the EDI's stated objectives, including
any changes in those stated objectives over the course
of the Initiative;
(2) Assess the extent to which EDI funding has
aligned with those objectives and describe the extent
to which the stated objectives have been fulfilled;
(3) Describe changes to U.S. military posture in
Europe since 2014 and evaluate the extent to which the
Department of Defense (DOD)'s planning for posture
initiatives funded under the EDI adequately estimates
their long-term costs and communicates their estimated
costs to the Congress;
(4) Describe the mechanisms, if any, the DOD has
established to maintain oversight of funding for EDI
efforts in the event of the transition from Overseas
Contingency Operations funding to base budget funding;
(5) Assess the extent to which DOD programming under
the EDI has shifted to account for the reemergence of
long-term strategic competition with China and Russia;
and
(6) Any other matters deemed relevant by the
Comptroller General.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
brief the Senate Armed Services Committee on the results of the
review not later than March 1, 2022, and issue a report to
follow at a time agreed to subsequent to the briefing.
Comptroller General review of logistics in the European theater
The committee notes that in the event of a conflict in
Europe, it will be necessary to rapidly move reinforcements and
materiel from the United States or elsewhere to the European
theater. The joint force will likely be called upon to open
ports or airfield locations; establish staging bases; conduct
reception, staging, onward movement, and integration operations
(RSOI) for forces entering the theater; and coordinate with
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies and partners
for transit and synchronization of transportation assets. In
September 2019, NATO established a new Joint Support and
Enabling Command (JSEC) in Ulm, Germany, responsible for
coordinating and safeguarding the movement of Allied forces and
equipment across European borders. However, the committee is
concerned that further work is necessary to build, train, and
integrate these capabilities. Therefore, the committee directs
the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a
review of plans, training, and integration of efforts to ensure
fast and efficient movement of forces and equipment to and
within the European theater. At a minimum, the review should
assess:
(1) The extent to which the Department of Defense has
integrated its planning and operations with the new
NATO JSEC;
(2) Any actions the Department is taking to address
concerns about the availability of transportation
assets, to include contracted commercial trucking, in
the event of a conflict in Europe;
(3) The Army's current capacity to meet potential
wartime demands for port opening and RSOI missions;
(4) The Army's efforts to increase the overall
readiness of its early deploying sustainment forces
since fiscal year 2018, in particular for port opening,
RSOI, and other missions performed early in a conflict;
(5) The extent to which early deploying sustainment
forces train to perform wartime missions under
conditions reflecting high intensity combat, including
training on functions required early in combat;
(6) The planning, training, and equipping across the
joint force for deploying a combat force through
austere ports or airfield locations; and
(7) Any other matters deemed relevant by the
Comptroller General.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide an interim briefing to the Senate Armed Services
Committee on the results of the review not later than May 1,
2022, and issue a report to follow at a time agreed to
subsequent to the briefing.
Comptroller General review of the approval process for contact between
Department of Defense personnel and Chinese government
officials
The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to review the process used by the Department of Defense
(DOD) to evaluate, and approve or deny, proposals for contact
between DOD personnel and Chinese government officials. At a
minimum, the review shall include:
(1) An identification of the laws and policies
governing contacts between DOD personnel and Chinese
government officials, including those contacts made in
pursuit of official responsibilities and under any
other circumstances;
(2) An articulation of the current process used by
the Department of Defense to evaluate, approve, or deny
proposals for contact between Department of Defense
personnel and Chinese government officials; and
(3) Any other matters deemed relevant by the
Comptroller General.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
brief the congressional defense committees on the results of
the review, not later than March 1, 2022, and issue a report to
follow at a time agreed to subsequent to the briefing.
Cyber cooperation with Vietnam, Thailand, and Indonesia
The committee notes that the William M. (Mac) Thornberry
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public
Law 116-283) authorized the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Secretary of State, to establish a pilot
program in Vietnam, Thailand, and Indonesia to enhance their
cyber security, resilience, and readiness through December 31,
2024. Additionally, the committee understands that U.S. Indo-
Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) is working with the Defense
Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) and the Department of State
to design and implement this program. The committee continues
to believe this pilot project is a worthwhile endeavor and
opportunity to strengthen bilateral and multilateral engagement
with partners in the Indo-Pacific region. Lastly, the committee
notes that the budget request includes more than $2.0 billion
for this and other security cooperation activities administered
by DSCA, and the committee looks forward to continued
engagement with the Department of Defense as spending
priorities are established for these funds.
Defense cooperation with Taiwan
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, not later
than March 1, 2022, to provide a briefing to the congressional
defense committees on the advisability and feasibility of
increasing United States defense cooperation with Taiwan,
including increasing Taiwan's military readiness through the
participation of Taiwan military personnel in joint military
exchanges and exercises including, but not limited to,
humanitarian assistance and disaster relief; enhancing academic
and professional military education opportunities; supporting
key leader engagements and senior leader visits; and other
efforts deemed relevant by the Secretary.
Developing country definition
The National Defense Strategy highlights strengthening
alliances and partnerships as a critical element of the U.S.
approach to long-term strategic competition with near-peer
rivals. A critical tool for building these security
relationships is the set of Department of Defense (DOD)
security cooperation authorities, including military-to-
military engagements, professional military education, and
joint training and exercises. The committee understands that
concerns have been raised within DOD that the definition of
``developing country'' traditionally used to determine country
eligibility for assistance under certain security cooperation
authorities may be outdated. The committee notes that under
chapter 16 of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of
Defense has broad latitude to prescribe and revise the term's
meaning for purposes of DOD security cooperation authorities.
The committee is concerned that the current definition overly
constrains the flexibility of the combatant commanders to build
defense relationships with key security partners that lack the
resources to cover the incremental costs of participating in
security cooperation activities. The committee urges the
Secretary of Defense to review the current definition of
``developing country'' and its impact on DOD security
cooperation programs and activities, and determine whether
revising that definition would be better aligned with U.S.
strategic objectives in building alliances and partnerships for
strategic competition. The Secretary of Defense should consult
closely with the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives in conducting this review.
Distributed airfields and ports for dispersed operations
The committee notes that U.S. military access to
distributed basing locations, airfields, and ports in the Indo-
Pacific region will be critical to operations under the
developing Joint Warfighting Concept. A network of
infrastructure with the capability and capacity to support
military operations is both supported by and reinforces
bilateral partnerships and alliances that remain a critical
comparative advantage for the United States over China in long-
term strategic competition.
Therefore, the committee expects that future investments
under the Pacific Deterrence Initiative in airfields, ports,
and other operating locations, including fuel and munitions
storage and distribution capacity, will be designed to
facilitate dispersed operations. Furthermore, the committee
believes investments in distributed military infrastructure
should also be complemented by other non-military
infrastructure and development investments using all financing
options available. These investments would help to counter
predatory infrastructure development practices of the People's
Republic of China that seek to undermine the United States'
network of allies and partners.
Ensuring the safety of America's Afghan allies
The committee notes the valuable and courageous
contributions of many Afghan civilians and officials who
supported United States counterterrorism and stability efforts
in Afghanistan since 2001. Their efforts saved the lives of
many U.S. servicemembers and diplomatic personnel, and the
committee is eternally grateful to them and eager to ensure
their safety after the withdrawal of U.S. troops.
The committee is deeply concerned that America's Afghan
allies will face retaliation after the drawdown is completed.
There are already reports of Taliban threats targeting those
who helped the United States, and these threats cannot be
ignored. As such, the committee encourages and supports the
Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) program for Afghans. This critical
program has already brought to the United States over 15,500
Afghans who served with bravery and honor alongside United
States troops in support of United States missions in
Afghanistan.
In order to best protect the Afghans whose lives remain at
risk, the committee urges the Biden Administration to implement
a strategy for ensuring the safety of America's Afghan allies
as soon as possible, whether through the SIV program or through
other authorities.
Forward deployed naval forces in Europe
The committee continues to support additional forward-
basing of U.S. Navy destroyers in Rota, Spain. The ships
currently stationed in Spain are among the most dynamically-
employed assets of U.S. global maritime presence--performing
ballistic missile defense missions; carrying out strikes in
Syria; boosting U.S. presence across the European theater in
support of allies and partners; and monitoring increasing
Russian naval activities. At the same time, these ships have
maintained some of the highest readiness rates of ships in the
Navy, in part due to rigorous maintenance practices.
The committee is concerned that increasing Russian naval
activity in the European theater, which is at its highest level
since the Cold War, presents a significant challenge to the
implementation of the National Defense Strategy in the European
theater. The committee is also aware of the significant
advances in Russian naval capability, especially in undersea
warfare.
Due in part to these developments, the Commander, U.S.
European Command, testified to the committee in February 2020
that he supports increasing from four to six the number of
destroyers based in Rota, Spain. The Commander said that, based
on the European Deterrence Initiative investments, Rota, Spain,
facilities could support two more destroyers immediately. He
also said that the two ships would ``improve our ability to get
indications and warnings in the potential battle space and also
dramatically improve our ability to better command and
control.'' In March 2020, the Chief of Naval Operations also
endorsed the additional naval presence before the committee.
The committee finds the arguments of senior defense leadership
to increase naval presence in Europe, and the mission
flexibility it would provide, compelling.
Therefore, the committee directs the Chief of Naval
Operations and the Commander, U.S. European Command, not later
than 15 days after the fiscal year 2023 budget request is
submitted to the Congress, to provide a briefing to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the plan to base two additional destroyers
at Rota, Spain. This brief shall include a detailed
explanation, by fiscal year, of actions and the associated
funding that will lead to the forward stationing of six
destroyers based in Rota as soon as practicable.
Medical support for Ukrainian soldiers
Section 1234 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) expanded the use of the
Secretarial Designee Program to provide for Ukrainian soldiers'
receipt of treatment at Department of Defense military
treatment facilities when the necessary care cannot be provided
in Ukraine.
The committee notes that implementation issues persist with
regard to covering non-medical expenses in connection with such
treatment. Such expenses include, but are not limited to, the
cost of transportation, lodging, meals, and incidentals for the
wounded and associated caregivers. The committee urges the
Secretary of Defense to coordinate with the Secretary of State,
Administrator of United States Agency for International
Development, relevant non-governmental organizations, and
senior Ukrainian officials to resolve these non-medical funding
issues.
Further, the committee encourages the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretary of State, to continue
efforts to develop Ukraine's capacity to care for wounded
members of the Ukrainian Armed Forces within Ukraine, including
building on notable progress in the areas of point-of-injury
care, medical evacuation, and the establishment of a combat
medic training program.
The Department of Defense should continue to consider
Secretarial Designee Program requests to provide specialized
care in U.S. military medical treatment facilities in the areas
of polytrauma, amputations, burn treatment, prosthetics, and
rehabilitation on a case-by-case basis.
Military mobility in Europe
The committee recognizes the importance of U.S. military
mobility in Europe. It supports the ability of North Atlantic
Treaty Organization and European partner forces to respond
swiftly to crises and thereby undergird the Alliance's credible
deterrent.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Commander, U.S. European Command and the
Supreme Allied Commander Europe, to submit to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
not later than December 1, 2022, a report on U.S. military
mobility in Europe. The report shall include an analysis of:
(1) Efforts thus far to implement a coherent approach
to military mobility-related practices with European
allies and partners with respect to regulations,
funding, and training;
(2) Opportunities to harmonize legal and regulatory
standards and risk-management practices to support and
enhance military mobility;
(3) How Chinese investment in critical
infrastructure, to include ports, railways, and
roadways may impede or otherwise influence military
mobility in Europe;
(4) Efforts the United States has undertaken with
European partners and allies to incorporate military
requirements into civilian infrastructure projects,
including an identification of priority dual-use
projects;
(5) The existing capacity of communications and
energy infrastructure as well as potential choke points
and vulnerabilities in a contested environment; and
(6) Any other matter the Secretary of Defense deems
relevant.
Operational support to Afghanistan National Defense and Security Forces
The committee notes that the transition of U.S. and
coalition military personnel from Afghanistan by mid-September
2021 does not constitute an end to counterterrorism operations
in Afghanistan. The United States, working together with allies
and partner nations, must continue to take actions to ensure
that Afghanistan does not become a location from which the
planning or projection of terrorist attacks against the
Homeland or around the globe once again occurs. The committee
expects that the Secretary of Defense will continue to provide
operational support to the Afghanistan National Defense and
Security Forces (ANDSF), including funding, equipment, military
advice, intelligence support, and fire support in connection
with:
(1) Counterterrorism operations against the Islamic
State of Iraq and Syria, al-Qaeda, or other terrorist
organizations in accordance with existing law and
Department of Defense policy; or
(2) The collective self-defense of the ANDSF.
The committee directs the Secretary to provide a briefing
on its plan to provide such support to the ANDSF to the
congressional defense committees not later than November 15,
2021.
Participation by Taiwan in multilateral security dialogues and forums
The committee believes that it is the common interest of
the United States and its allies and partners to strive for a
Indo-Pacific region that is free, open, inclusive, resilient,
anchored by democratic values, and unconstrained by coercion.
The committee also believes the United States should work
closely with allies and partners to respond to the most urgent
of global challenges, including economic and health impacts of
COVID-19, as well as issues associated with cyberspace,
critical technologies, humanitarian assistance and disaster
relief, and the maritime domain. Lastly, the committee believes
that Taiwan is a vital part of the free and open Indo-Pacific
region based on rules-based order and democratic values, and it
is in the political, security and economic interests of the
United States to advocate for Taiwan's meaningful participation
and contributions to multilateral dialogues and forums on
issues of global concern.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
not later than January 15, 2022, to provide the congressional
defense committees a briefing on Department of Defense efforts
to meaningfully engage Taiwan in multilateral dialogues or
forums that shall, at a minimum, include:
(1) The feasibility and advisability of including
Taiwan in various security dialogues or forums;
(2) An assessment of opportunities for increasing
Taiwan's participation in multilateral security
dialogues or forums related to specific issues,
including:
(a) humanitarian assistance and disaster
relief;
(b) supply chain security;
(c) cybersecurity; and
(d) maritime security; and
(3) Any other matters the Secretary deems
appropriate.
Plan for maintaining oversight of funds and activities of Afghanistan
Security Forces Fund
The committee notes the critical importance of continuing
support to the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces,
while conducting appropriate oversight of funds authorized
after the transition of United States and coalition partner
nation forces from Afghanistan. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing not
later than December 15, 2021, regarding the plan to execute
funds and activities authorized in the Afghan Security Forces
Fund beyond the transition of United States forces from
Afghanistan.
Public reporting of Chinese military companies operating in the United
States
The committee notes that section 1260H of the William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) directs the Secretary of Defense
to identify each entity the Secretary determines, based on the
most recent information available, is operating directly or
indirectly in the United States, or any of its territories and
possessions, that is a Chinese military company.
The committee directs the Secretary, in implementing
section 1260H of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, to ensure due
consideration is given to Chinese major technology companies
that are operating directly or indirectly in the United States
or any of its territories and possessions.
Support to Kurdish Peshmerga for counterterrorism and border security
operations
The committee strongly supports assistance to the Iraqi
Security Forces including Kurdish Peshmerga forces, for the
purposes authorized in the Counter Train and Equip Fund (CTEF),
including for defending Iraq, its people, allies, and partner
nations from the threat posed by the Islamic State of Iraq and
Syria (ISIS) and groups supporting ISIS and securing the
territory of Iraq. The committee commends the efforts of the
Kurdish Peshmerga in ensuring the lasting defeat of ISIS and
strongly supports continued efforts to sustain and build upon
their partnership with other Iraqi Security Forces and the
United States. As the campaign to counter ISIS moves into a new
phase, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, not
later than November 1, 2021 to report on:
(1) An assessment of gaps in the capabilities of
Iraqi Security Forces, including Kurdish Peshmerga
forces, to conduct counterterrorism and border security
operations in Iraq;
(2) Plans to provide Kurdish Peshmerga forces
training and assistance focused on building
counterterrorism and border security operations in
coordination with the Government of Iraq; and
(3) A plan to support the Kurdish Peshmerga in
coordination with the Government of Iraq, whether
through CTEF, other authorities, or a memorandum of
understanding.
United States support to partner military medical services
The committee recognizes that certain partner foreign
security forces participating in U.S.-led coalition operations
have a critical need to build their medical capacity to care
for military and civilian personnel wounded in military
operations in line with obligations under the law of armed
conflict. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives, not later than January 31, 2022,
a report on Department of Defense (DOD) programs and activities
to support and enhance the medical capacity of foreign national
security forces receiving DOD assistance or support. The report
shall include the following elements:
(1) A description of DOD programs and activities that
currently support foreign medical corps capacity
building, including a list of forces that have received
such medical service capacity building support in the
past 24 months and a description of such support
provided to each recipient;
(2) An assessment of whether programs and activities
currently authorized to support foreign medical corps
capacity building are sufficient to provide combat
casualty care treatment and equipment that meets or
exceeds DOD treatment standards, including those
recommended by the Committee on Tactical Combat
Casualty Care;
(3) An assessment of the efficacy of DOD programs to
support the medical capacities of foreign national
security forces receiving DOD assistance or support and
any recommendations on whether further authorities or
resources are needed to reach DOD standards; and
(4) A summary assessment of the capacity and key gaps
within the military medical corps of Afghanistan and
Iraq, with a focus on their ability to provide
battlefield medical care to soldiers and wounded
civilians in line with obligations under the law of
armed conflict. The report shall be in unclassified
form but may include a classified annex.
United States-Greenland strategic relationship
The committee notes the strategic importance of Greenland,
a semi-autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark,
including its geostrategic location astride the transatlantic
lines of communication, key role in the Arctic, hosting of
Thule Air Base, and potential importance to rare earth material
supply chains. The committee also notes the increase in
activity of the People's Republic of China in the Arctic
region. These geopolitical dynamics highlight the importance of
United States investments in Greenland as evidenced by the
September 17, 2018 ``Statement of Intent on Defense Investments
in Greenland.''
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
not later than December 15, 2021, to provide the Senate Armed
Services Committee a briefing on Department of Defense
activities, plans, and investments related to Greenland. At a
minimum, the briefing shall include a detailed description of:
(1) The current United States military force posture
in Greenland and plans for future force posture
changes;
(2) United States military and North Atlantic Treaty
Organization military rotations of forces to Greenland
conducted in the last 2 years and any planned rotations
in the next 2 years;
(3) United States-funded infrastructure projects
being executed or planned at Thule Air Base and other
locations on the island, including projects associated
with the 2018 ``Statement of Intent on Defense
Investments in Greenland'';
(4) Whether current base operations and maintenance
support arrangements at Thule Air Base are meeting
mission requirements and what impact any anticipated
changes to such arrangements would have on the ability
to meet such requirements going forward; and
(5) Any other matters the Secretary deems
appropriate.
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION
Funding allocations; specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction
funds (sec. 1301)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$239.84 million for the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR)
program, define the funds as authorized to be appropriated in
section 301 of this Act, and authorize CTR funds to be
available for obligation for fiscal years 2022, 2023, and 2024.
Items of Special Interest
Training for Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams
The committee emphasizes the importance of regular training
for weapons of mass destruction civil support teams (WMD-CSTs)
to maintain readiness. The committee recognizes that such
training opportunities are often only offered at facilities
that are located at unreasonably far distances from National
Guard units' home stations. The committee assesses that units
may incur prohibitively high costs for the travel associated
with participating in such training, which may risk diminishing
units' activities and effectiveness. The committee thus
determines that the Department of Defense and the Department of
Energy may lack sufficient capacity to regularly train WMD-CSTs
to a degree that maintains readiness.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Chief of the National Guard Bureau and
the Secretary of Energy, to study the feasibility of increasing
training capacity for WMD-CSTs, including through the creation
of new facilities and programs and through the augmentation of
extant facilities and programs to provide such training. The
study shall estimate the costs associated with increasing
training capacity for WMD-CSTs and shall identify prospective
facilities and programs that could provide such training. The
Secretary shall provide a report on the study to the
congressional defense committees not later than December 31,
2022.
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
Subtitle A--Military Programs
Working capital funds (sec. 1401)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriations for the defense working capital funds at the
levels identified in section 4501 of division D of this Act.
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense (sec. 1402)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriations for Chemical Agents and Munitions
Destruction, Defense, at the levels identified in section 4501
of division D of this Act.
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-wide (sec. 1403)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriations for Drug Interdiction and Counter-drug
Activities, Defense-wide, at the levels identified in section
4501 of division D of this Act.
Defense Inspector General (sec. 1404)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriations for the Office of the Inspector General of
the Department of Defense at the levels identified in section
4501 of division D of this Act.
Defense Health Program (sec. 1405)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the Defense Health Program activities at the
levels identified in section 4501 of division D of this Act.
Subtitle B--Armed Forces Retirement Home
Authorization of appropriations for Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec.
1411)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
an appropriation of $75.3 million from the Armed Forces
Retirement Home Trust Fund for fiscal year 2022 for the
operation of the Armed Forces Retirement Home.
Subtitle C--Other Matters
Authorization to loan materials in National Defense Stockpile (sec.
1421)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 98e of title 50, United States Code, to authorize the
loan of National Defense Stockpile materials to the Department
of Energy or the military departments if certain criteria are
met. The committee remains concerned that the National Defense
Stockpile is still not agile enough to acquire and dispose of
strategic and critical materials, including rare earth
elements, in order to meet rapidly changing military
requirements.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Director of the
Defense Logistics Agency to provide a briefing to the Senate
Armed Services Committee not later than March 1, 2022, on a
plan to transition National Defense Stockpile acquisitions and
disposals to a direct appropriations process.
Repeal of termination of biennial report on National Defense Stockpile
requirements (sec. 1422)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1061(i) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to ensure Congress
continues to receive the biennial report on the National
Defense Stockpile.
Authority for transfer of funds to joint Department of Defense-
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration
Fund for Captain James A. Lovell Health Care Center, Illinois
(sec. 1423)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to transfer $137.0 million from the
Defense Health Program to the Joint Department of Defense-
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration
Fund, established by section 1704 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84), for
the operation of the Captain James A. Lovell Federal Health
Care Center.
TITLE XV--SPACE ACTIVITIES, STRATEGIC PROGRAMS, AND INTELLIGENCE
MATTERS
Subtitle A--Space Activities
Delegation of authorities to Space Development Agency (sec. 1501)
The committee recommends a provision that would, to the
extent practicable, ensure delegation from the Secretary of the
Air Force, through the Service Acquisition Executive for Space
(SAE Space), to the Space Development Agency of head of
contracting authority and milestone decision authority for
middle tier acquisition programs. Elsewhere in this Act, the
committee recommends delegation of Senior Procurement Executive
authority to the SAE Space. In doing so, the committee stresses
the importance of ensuring that as the SAE Space develops broad
procurement policies consistent with the SAE Space's role as
the Senior Procurement Executive across Space Force acquisition
components and that SAE Space ensures the unique attributes of
the Space Development Agency are accounted for in these
policies.
In that regard, not later than 60 days after the formal
transition of the Space Development Agency to the Space Force,
the committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide
a report to the congressional defense committees on elements of
the actions taken by the SAE that enable the Space Development
Agency to perform its unique mission. These authorities will
remain in place post transfer to Space Force.
Modification to Space Development Agency (sec. 1502)
The committee recommends a provision that would exempt the
Space Development Agency (SDA) from the Joint Capabilities and
Integration Development System process. Additionally, the
provision would direct the SDA Director to convene a Combatant
Commander and Warfighter Council at least twice annually to
establish capability plans and recommend priorities for the
SDA.
Disclosure of National Security Space Launch program contract pricing
terms (sec. 1503)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Air Force to provide the congressional defense committees with
the pricing terms for any award to launch a national security
payload under the National Security Space Launch program. Such
data would be protected, as required by law under section 1905
of title 18, United States Code.
Extension and modification of Council on Oversight of the Department of
Defense Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Enterprise (sec.
1504)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2279b of title 10, United States Code, to include
oversight of alternative positioning, navigation, and timing by
the Council on Oversight of the Department of Defense
Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Enterprise, consistent with
section 1611 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-
283). The provision would also modify the Council's date of
termination.
Senior Procurement Executive authority (sec. 1505)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide the
Secretary of the Air Force the authority to delegate to the
Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Space Acquisition and
Integration duties and authorities of the Senior Procurement
Executive that relate to space systems and programs. The
committee notes that elsewhere in this Act it recommends a
provision that would transfer space acquisition projects from
the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Space Acquisition
and Integration to the Service Acquisition Executive for Space
not later than October 1, 2022. The committee notes that the
Secretary currently has a similar delegation authority for the
Service Acquisition Executive of the Air Force.
Modifications to Space Force Acquisition Council (sec. 1506)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 9021 of title 10, United States Code, to change the
name of the Space Force Acquisition Council to the Space
Acquisition Council.
Modifications relating to the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for
Space Acquisition and Integration (sec. 1507)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 9021(c) of title 10, United States Code, to modify the
role of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Space
Acquisition and Integration to include broader responsibilities
for acquisition integration of space architectures across the
Department of Defense (DOD). These responsibilities would
transfer not later than October 1, 2022, when the Assistant
Secretary of the Air Force for Space Acquisition and
Integration becomes the Service Acquisition Executive for the
Space Force. The provision would further ensure that the
Assistant Secretary is responsible for overseeing all
architecture and integration of DOD space programs with respect
to their acquisition. The committee interprets the word
``oversee'' to mean ``to see to officially, as one in charge of
work done by others; or to have overall responsibility for.''
The provision would also designate the Chief of Space
Operations as the force design architect for the Department's
space programs.
The provision would additionally modify the role of the
Space Force Acquisition Council to include certification of
architecture determinations made by the Assistant Secretary.
Upon certification, which would be forwarded to the
congressional defense committees, no further action could be
taken for 60 days. The Secretary of Defense may waive this
condition if they determine there is an exigent national
security condition--a justification of which must be submitted
to the congressional defense committees.
A principal aim of the creation of the Space Force was to
establish an integrated and consolidated approach across the
Department for the development of space architectures for the
Department's satellite constellations performing national
security missions. This was made clear in the report language
accompanying the establishment of the Space Force in the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020. The
report language (H. Rept. 116-333) accompanying the subtitle in
question stated that ``The amendment would rename the Principal
Assistant to the Secretary of the Air Force for Space as the
Assistant Secretary for Space Acquisition and Integration
(ASAF/SP), who would report directly to the Secretary of the
Air Force and serve as the senior architect for space systems
and programs across the Department of Defense.'' In the absence
of the Department's action, this provision would implement that
intent.
Modification to transfer of acquisition projects for space systems and
programs (sec. 1508)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
required transfer of space acquisition projects to the
Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Space Acquisition and
Integration from October 1, 2022, to not later than October 1,
2022.
Extension and modification of certifications regarding integrated
tactical warning and attack assessment mission of the Air Force
(sec. 1509)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
section 1666 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328), as amended by section
1604 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283),
through fiscal year 2026 and require the certification be made
in consultation with the commanders of U.S. Strategic Command
and U.S. Northern Command. The committee emphasizes that the
ability to determine with high confidence whether an attack on
the Homeland would involve a nuclear weapon should be one of
the highest priorities for U.S. Space Command.
Prohibition on Missile Defense Agency production of satellites and
ground systems associated with operation of such satellites
(sec. 1510)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Missile Defense Agency from entering into a program of
record to develop and field operational satellite constellation
and ground systems. The provision would permit the Missile
Defense Agency to field prototype satellites meeting Missile
Defense Agency unique requirements. The committee has learned
that the Missile Defense Agency cannot implement section 1645
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116-92) for hypersonic and ballistic missile
tracking, which requires the Missile Defense Agency to place
its Medium Field of View sensor on a Space Development Agency
satellite, due to a misalignment of orbit requirements between
those of the Space Development Agency and the Missile Defense
Agency. This misalignment now requires the Missile Defense
Agency to field two prototype satellites for hypersonic and
ballistic missile tracking. The committee is acutely concerned
that the Missile Defense Agency, which reports to the
Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, could
be fielding a program of record of satellite constellations and
ground systems. The reason why the Congress created the Space
Force was explicitly to consolidate space functions of the
Department of Defense into the Space Force. Accordingly, the
provision prohibits the Missile Defense Agency from developing
satellite constellations and ground systems beyond a prototype
stage. The Space Force will design, field, and operate the
required program of record satellite constellation and ground
systems for ballistic missile and hypersonic missile tracking.
Continued requirement for National Security Space Launch program (sec.
1511)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
Launch Services providers to continue to meet Federal
requirements, with respect to payload to reference orbits, for
Phase Two National Security Space Launch.
Limitation, report, and briefing on use of commercial satellite
services and associated systems (sec. 1512)
The committee recommends a provision that would ensure that
critical defense functions do not solely rely on commercial
satellite services and associated systems. These functions
typically consist of nuclear command, control, and
communications to disseminate Emergency Action Messages,
Integrated Warning and Attack Assessment, mission- and time-
critical targeting, and certain senior leadership
communications associated with continuity of government.
The provision would also require the Secretary of Defense,
on at least a quarterly basis, to provide to the congressional
defense committees a report and briefing on the Department of
Defense's reliance on commercial services and associated
systems to provide capability and additional capacity and would
detail certain required elements of the report and briefing.
Study on commercial systems integration into, and support of, Armed
Forces space operations (sec. 1513)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force to enter into an arrangement with a
federally funded research and development center (FFRDC) to
conduct an assessment on the extent of reliance by the
Department of Defense on commercial satellite systems.
The committee understands the importance of the use of
commercial systems for communications, as well as other forms
of sensor operations. It is not understood to what degree the
Department should rely on such commercial systems. It should be
well understood that critical functions such as emergency
action messages to direct nuclear forces should have, at their
core, a system managed by the Department of Defense but
complemented by commercial communications for the broadest form
of resilience. Unknown is what risks this reliance poses to the
Department and to the investors of the commercial companies,
especially during a time of conflict. Further, the committee
finds a lack of understanding on the risk of a commercial
entity becoming a combatant, and whether that risk is
represented to insurers and investors. It is essential that the
Department and commercial entities understand this risk so that
the Department can ascertain whether it obtained a fair and
reasonable price for the services it is relying on now, rather
than at some later date. The committee expects the Secretary
and the FFRDC to obtain the widest set of viewpoints, including
the national security community, commercial space companies,
insurers, and a legal analysis of combatant and non-combatant
status. This assessment would be due to the congressional
defense committees not later than 270 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act in unclassified form, with a
classified annex if required.
Space policy review (sec. 1514)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Director of
National Intelligence, to conduct reviews of the space policy
of the Department of Defense to be submitted concurrently with
the President's budget for fiscal years 2024 through 2026. The
provision would detail required elements of each review, to
include an assessment of recommended changes and supported
funding over the succeeding 5 years.
Annual briefing on threats to space operations (sec. 1515)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Chief of Space Operations, in consultation with the Director of
the Defense Intelligence Agency, to provide an annual briefing
through 2026 to the congressional defense and intelligence
committees on the threats posed by the Russian Federation, the
People's Republic of China, and any other relevant country to
the conduct of United States operations in space.
Subtitle B--Defense Intelligence and Intelligence-Related Activities
Authority for Army counterintelligence agents to execute warrants and
make arrests (sec. 1521)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 7377 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize Army
counterintelligence civilian special agents to serve warrants
and make arrests when conducting counterintelligence
investigations.
Annual briefing by Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency on
electronic warfare threat to operations of the Department of
Defense (sec. 1522)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency to provide to the
congressional defense and intelligence committees an annual
briefing on the electronic warfare threats posed to the U.S.
military from Russia, China, and other relevant nations through
2026.
Subtitle C--Nuclear Forces
Participation in United States Strategic Command strategic deterrence
exercises (sec. 1531)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
involvement from a number of senior civilian and military
officials in nuclear command, control, and communications
exercises, as well as the decision making with respect to them.
The provision does not mandate complete involvement for the
entire duration of the exercise, but sufficient involvement to
assure familiarity with the processes, the systems in place,
and the outcome of the decision process so that it can be
improved. While the committee believes and hopes that such an
exercise lies at the extreme end of the escalation spectrum,
senior leaders must participate in the exercise so the outcomes
and improvements in the quality of the decision making can
impart lessons learned into more common escalation scenarios
affecting the national security and well-being of the Nation.
The committee notes that many of these same systems serve as a
crisis communications backbone in the more common escalation
scenarios referenced, hence the importance of using them in the
most stressed scenarios. Finally, the committee believes that
involving senior leaders in these exercises will import to them
the importance of a robust, resilient and user oriented
decision system in future acquisition planning the Department
is responsible for, and the timely generation and fulfillment
of the requirements associated with future senior leader
communications and decision systems.
Modification to requirements relating to nuclear force reductions (sec.
1532)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 494 of title 10, United States Code, to extend the
existing timeline for notifying Congress prior to any
reductions in the number of deployed U.S. nuclear weapons;
eliminate the previous sunset on a conditional net assessment
by the Commander, U.S. Strategic Command, of the capability of
the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile to deter global nuclear
threats; and update the date of effect for any changes to the
U.S. stockpile. The provision would also adjust the existing
requirements for the Secretary of Defense to include submission
of an assessment to the congressional defense committees of
whether any proposals by the President to reduce the size of
the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile would result in the size of
the U.S. stockpile becoming a number less than that of the
intelligence community's high-confidence assessment of the size
of the Russian Federation's and the People's Republic of
China's nuclear weapons stockpiles. The provision would further
clarify that non-permanent reductions in the U.S. nuclear
weapons stockpile--to ensure the safety, security, reliability,
and credibility of U.S. nuclear forces--would not trigger the
requirement for a net assessment. Finally, the provision would
eliminate the Presidential certification and notification
requirements relating to recommendations to reduce the size of
the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile.
Modifications to requirements relating to unilateral changes in nuclear
weapons stockpile of the United States (sec. 1533)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 498 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify that
nuclear force reductions pursuant to a treaty, to which the
Senate has provided its advice and consent, are exempted from
the existing reporting requirement. The provision would also
expand the categories of covered changes to include the total
number of deployed nuclear weapons as well as the total nuclear
weapons stockpile; reduce the triggering threshold for
reductions that require a Nuclear Posture Review to 15 percent;
and make a conforming edit to the requirement for transmitting
such Nuclear Posture Review to the Congress prior to enacting
said reductions.
Deadline for reports on modification of force structure for strategic
nuclear weapons delivery systems (sec. 1534)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 493 of title 10, United States Code, to extend the
existing timeline for prior notification to the Congress of any
modification of the force structure for the strategic nuclear
weapons delivery systems of the United States.
Modification of deadline for notifications relating to reduction,
consolidation, or withdrawal of nuclear forces based in Europe
(sec. 1535)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 497 of title 10, United States Code, to extend the
existing timeline for prior notification to the Congress of any
reduction, consolidation, or withdrawal of the nuclear forces
of the United States based in Europe.
Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States
(sec. 1536)
The committee recommends a provision that would create a
congressional commission of 12 members to evaluate developments
in the international security environment since the completion
of the 2009 Congressional Commission on Strategic Posture
report to the Congress, assess a variety of factors relating to
U.S. nuclear weapons policies and factors shaping strategic
stability, make recommendations as the committee deems
necessary, and submit a report of its findings, conclusions,
and recommendations to the President and the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than December 31, 2022.
The provision would also require the Department of Defense
(DOD), the Department of Energy, the Department of State, and
the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to provide
the Commission with analyses, briefings, and other information
necessary for the fulfillment of its responsibilities.
Over the previous decade, the Russian Federation, which
maintains the world's largest nuclear arsenal, has modernized
more than 80 percent of its strategic nuclear forces, has
expanded its already extensive theater-range nuclear
capabilities, and is working to develop a wide array of novel
nuclear weapons systems unlike any currently fielded. The
People's Republic of China is in the midst of the world's most
aggressive modernization and expansion of nuclear forces and
nuclear weapons production capabilities. By the mid-2020s, the
People's Republic of China is anticipated to complete its own
strategic nuclear triad, and will continue its rapid
modernization and expansion efforts as it seeks to be a
strategic peer to the United States, possibly within the next
decade. North Korea, while currently possessing a relatively
modest nuclear arsenal when compared to the Russian Federation
or the People's Republic of China, continues to pursue publicly
announced plans to develop miniaturized nuclear warheads,
tactical nuclear weapons, multiple independently targetable
nuclear reentry vehicles for missiles, solid-fuel ballistic
missiles of varying ranges, nuclear propulsion systems for
submarines, and hypersonic boost-glide vehicles to threaten the
United States and its allies in the region. Conversely, the
U.S. is in the early stages of an effort to reestablish a
complete nuclear weapons production capability and replace its
existing nuclear forces, and has no plans to expand the size of
its stockpile nor to develop a suite of exotic nuclear weapons
systems.
The conclusions of the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review
recognized the changes in the security environment and the
risks of instability resulting from an international landscape
where the United States must contend with two nuclear peers
with modernized and diverse arsenals. As the Biden
Administration begins its review of U.S. nuclear policies and
works to craft its own approach to this complex and dangerous
new reality, it is imperative that the Congress reestablish the
Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United
States to examine the developments in the international
security environment since the last assessment in 2009 and to
ensure the Administration has access to the recommendations of
some of the most respected and esteemed experts in matters of
strategic deterrence that the United States has to offer.
Revised Nuclear Posture Review (sec. 1537)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Under Secretary of
Defense for Policy and the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, to conduct a comprehensive review of U.S. nuclear
posture for the next 5 to 10 years. The provision details the
contents to be included in such a review, and would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report on the results of the
review to Congress in 2022, along with the national defense
strategy required under section 113(g) of title 10, United
States Code.
Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent development program accountability
matrices (sec. 1538)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
accountability matrices for the Ground-Based Strategic
Deterrent (GBSD) program, similar to those required for the B-
21 bomber program under section 238 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328).
The committee notes that the GBSD program is a complex
Major Defense Acquisition Program. The use of this report
format early in the program, combined with concurrent
assessments by the Comptroller General of the United States,
will establish the necessary congressional oversight of this
program to ensure it is being executed as described by the
Department of Defense in budget documents to the congressional
defense committees.
Procurement authority for certain parts of Ground-Based Strategic
Deterrent cryptographic device (sec. 1539)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide the
Secretary of the Air Force the authority to use Air Force
procurement funds to purchase Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS)
parts qualified for use in the Ground Based Strategic
Deterrent's nuclear command and control cryptographic device
(KS-75) supporting the life of the KS-75 program. This
provision would provide authority for a single fiscal year 2022
life-of-type buy (LOTB) request for the KS-75 cryptographic
device in the amount of $10.0 million. The committee notes that
procurement of these parts in quantities to support production
and spares is necessary to support the qualification, test, and
National Security Agency (NSA) certification of COTS parts
operating in the nuclear command and control environment. The
Government's qualification and certification is limited to
specific production lots due to variations in supplier
processes and materials that can significantly change
electronics performance. Parts available from the supplier in
subsequent production lots or from other suppliers are required
to undergo a delta or complete recertification process
(depending on severity of design change) to obtain NSA approval
for use in nuclear command and control weapon systems. If re-
design is required, the parts would require a new part number
and separate supply chain management activities associated with
a second KS-75 configuration.
Mission-design series popular name for Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent
(sec. 1540)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Secretary of the Air Force, in coordination with the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, to
establish a mission-design series popular name for the Ground-
Based Strategic Deterrent not later than 30 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act. The provision would also require
the Secretary of the Air Force to notify the congressional
defense committees of the completion of the requirement not
later than 10 days after completion.
B-21 Raider nuclear capability and integration with Long-Range Standoff
Weapon (sec. 1541)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force to ensure that the Long-Range
Standoff Weapon is fully integrated with the B-21 not later
than 2 years after the Long-Range Standoff Weapon achieves
initial operational capability.
The committee believes that the B-21 Raider bomber
represents a valuable future addition to the U.S. nuclear
deterrent, one that, when paired with the Long-Range Standoff
Weapon, will ensure the continued effectiveness of the air leg
of the strategic triad.
Comptroller General study and updated report on nuclear weapons
capabilities and force structure requirements (sec. 1542)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a study on
the nuclear capabilities, force structure, employment policy,
and targeting requirements of the Department of Defense. The
provision would further detail the contents of the report and
direct the Comptroller General to provide a briefing on
preliminary findings to the congressional defense committees
not later than March 31, 2022, with the final report to follow
on a date agreed upon by the Comptroller General and the
congressional defense committees.
Following the completion of the Department of Defense's
(DOD) 2010 Nuclear Posture Review, the administration concluded
that the United States could reduce the role of nuclear weapons
in the U.S. security strategy. At the time, the United States
was believed to be facing a more benign nuclear threat
environment, having recently concluded the New START Treaty
with the Russian Federation. The administration also expected
to continue to substantially reduce the size of its nuclear
weapons stockpile, as had been the case since the end of the
Cold War, and would need to adjust its targeting and planning
requirements accordingly.
To better understand the implications of such changes in
the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile and to future targeting and
planning requirements, the Congress directed the Comptroller
General of the United States to update a September 27, 1991,
Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on the nuclear
weapons targeting process, titled ``Strategic Weapons: Nuclear
Weapons Targeting Process'' (GAO/NSIAD-91-319FS), in section
1047 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2012 (Public Law 112-81). The resulting GAO report, published
July 31, 2012, titled, ``Strategic Weapons: Changes in the
Nuclear Weapons Targeting Process Since 1991'' (GAO-12-786R),
found that the fundamental objectives of U.S. nuclear
deterrence policy had remained largely consistent since 1991,
even as the threat environment and size of the stockpile had
changed.
Since GAO's 2012 report, the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile
has been further reduced in response to New START Treaty
provisions, which were achieved in February 2018, and were
recently extended through February 4, 2026. However, as noted
in the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review, the global nuclear threat
environment has become more complex and has deteriorated
significantly over the past decade, as Russia, China, and North
Korea took steps to add new nuclear capabilities to their
arsenals and increase reliance on nuclear forces in their
strategies and plans.
As the Department of Defense and the National Nuclear
Security Administration continue their multi-decade effort to
modernize the Nation's nuclear forces and preserve the existing
deterrent capabilities, it is important that the Congress
understand how the development of nuclear force requirements
has evolved and how these requirements inform investment
decisions on the resulting programs.
Accordingly, the study recommended by the committee in the
provision would, at a minimum, update the GAO's 2012 report,
including any changes to:
(1) How the Department of Defense has assessed
threats and modified its nuclear deterrence policy;
(2) Targeting and employment guidance from the
President, the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Commander, U.S.
Strategic Command;
(3) Nuclear weapons planning and targeting, including
categories and types of targets;
(4) Strategic nuclear forces, including the
stockpile, force posture, and modernization;
(5) The level of civilian oversight;
(6) The relationship between targeting and
requirements; and
(7) Any other matters considered appropriate by the
Comptroller General.
Finally, the committee notes that the Government
Accountability Office's statutory right of access encompasses
the information required for this review, including
information, guidance, and other documentation related to
nuclear planning, targeting, capabilities, and operations.
Accordingly, the committee expects the Secretary of Defense,
the Secretary of Energy, and the Administrator for Nuclear
Security to provide the Comptroller General with full
cooperation and access to appropriate officials, guidance, and
other documentation.
Prohibition on reduction of the intercontinental ballistic missiles of
the United States (sec. 1543)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the obligation or expenditure of fiscal year 2022 funds to
reduce deployed U.S. intercontinental ballistic missiles'
responsiveness, alert level, or quantity to fewer than 400. The
provision would provide an exception to this prohibition for
activities related to maintenance, sustainment, and
replacement, or activities to ensure safety, security, or
reliability.
Limitation on use of funds until completion of analysis of alternatives
for nuclear sea-launched cruise missile (sec. 1544)
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
amount obligated or expended for the operations of the Office
of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, and
Capabilities to not more than 90 percent of the amount
authorized by this Act until the Under Secretary of Defense for
Policy provides a briefing on the analysis of alternatives for
the nuclear sea-launched cruise missile. The provision would
also require the Chairman of the Nuclear Weapons Council to
provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees on
the planned management structure for the joint missile and
warhead development program not later than April 1, 2022.
Sense of the Senate on NATO security and nuclear cooperation between
the United States and the United Kingdom (sec. 1545)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of the Senate that the independent nuclear deterrents of
the United States, the United Kingdom, and the French Republic
are the supreme guarantee of the security of the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization (NATO). The provision would further express
the sense of the Senate that the United States and the United
Kingdom face similar challenges in modernizing their aging
nuclear deterrents and that continued nuclear cooperation
between the United States and the United Kingdom is in the
national security interests of the United States.
Sense of the Senate on maintaining diversity in the nuclear weapons
stockpile (sec. 1546)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of the Senate that a technologically diverse nuclear
weapons stockpile that reduces the impact of technical issues
in any single weapon type is in the national security interest
of the United States and that the United States should maintain
no fewer than two distinct types of deployed nuclear weapons
per leg of the nuclear triad.
Sense of the Senate on the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent (sec. 1547)
The committee recommends a provision that would outline a
series of findings relating to the need to pursue the Ground-
Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) program to replace the
Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile weapon system
and express the sense of the Senate that intercontinental
ballistic missiles are a critical component of the U.S. nuclear
deterrent; the continued development of the GBSD system is
needed; modernization programs may increase opportunities for
effective arms control; and that prioritizing execution of the
GBSD program prior to the retirement of the Minuteman III
system is in the national security interest of the United
States.
Subtitle D--Missile Defense Programs
Authority to develop and deploy Next Generation Interceptor for missile
defense of the United States homeland (sec. 1551)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Director of the Missile Defense Agency, subject to the
availability of appropriations, to develop a highly reliable
missile defense interceptor for the Ground-based Midcourse
Defense system using sound acquisition practices. The Director
would also be required to develop a funding plan addressing
certain features of the program, submit a report on the funding
profile necessary for the program with the fiscal year 2023
budget request, and notify the Congress within 30 days of any
final decisions to cancel the program.
The committee recognizes that the threat of long-range
missile attacks against the United States continues to
increase, with growing risks from adversary acquisition of
greater numbers of more complex systems with the capability to
hold the U.S. Homeland at risk. In order to pace this threat,
the capabilities of the United States' Ground-based Midcourse
Defense system must continue to evolve, even as the United
States works to develop future defensive technologies.
Annual reliability testing for the Next Generation Interceptor (sec.
1552)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Director of the Missile Defense Agency, to develop and execute
a plan for conducting annual reliability testing for the Next
Generation Interceptor (NGI) within 5 years of a declaration of
initial operational capability and ensure at least one test a
year is performed in an operational setting for the ground
based mid-course missile defense. The provision would also
require the Director to provide a report, not later than the
date of approval for the NGI program to enter the production
phase of its acquisition process, to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the
estimated costs for conducting said tests, including
procurement of sufficient assets to accommodate testing of one
interceptor per year over the life of the system.
Next Generation Interceptor program accountability matrices (sec. 1553)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Director of the Missile Defense Agency to submit annually, with
the President's budget request, a matrix that identifies, in 6-
month increments, key milestones, development events, specific
performance goals, cost tracking, and independent reviews for
the technology and product development phases of the Next
Generation Interceptor (NGI) program. The provision would also
require the Director to update these annual matrices not later
than 180 days after each submission and would direct the
Comptroller General of the United States to review the annually
submitted matrices and brief the congressional defense
committees within 60 days of receipt. The requirements of the
provision would terminate 1 year after the NGI achieves initial
production.
Extension of period for transition of ballistic missile defense
programs to military departments (sec. 1554)
The committee recommends a provision that would adjust the
date on which the Secretary of Defense should transfer the
acquisition authority and the total obligation authority for
each missile defense program from the date on which the
President's budget request for fiscal year 2023 is submitted
under section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, to October
1, 2023.
The committee notes that the Department of Defense has a
troubled track record of transitioning missile defense
acquisition programs to the military services. However,
successfully ensuring these programs efficiently move from
Missile Defense Agency-led research and development to service-
led system acquisition is crucial to the long term viability of
the missile defense enterprise. The committee expects the
Department to address this issue within the context of the
administration's review of U.S. missile defense policies over
the coming months.
Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system and Israeli cooperative
missile defense program co-development and co-production (sec.
1555)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide
funding for the procurement of the Iron Dome short-range rocket
defense system, David's Sling Weapon System, and Arrow 3 Upper
Tier Interceptor Program as outlined under the Memorandum of
Agreement between the United States and the Government of
Israel for cooperative missile defense programs.
Semiannual updates on meetings held by the Missile Defense Executive
Board (sec. 1556)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Under Secretaries of Defense for Research and Engineering and
Acquisition and Sustainment, as co-chairs of the Missile
Defense Executive Board, to provide a semiannual update to the
congressional defense committees on the meetings and decisions
of the Board not later than March 1 and September 1 of each
year. The co-chairs would not be required to provide an update
on decisions of the Board relating to the budget of the
President for a fiscal year if the budget for that fiscal year
has not been submitted to the Congress as of the date of the
semiannual update.
The co-chairs may submit the update to the committees as
either a briefing or a written report.
Independent study of Department of Defense components' roles and
responsibilities relating to missile defense (sec. 1557)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to enter into a contract with the National
Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) to provide a report to
the congressional defense committees that assesses missile
defense roles and responsibilities within the Department of
Defense (DOD), identifies inefficiencies and opportunities for
improvement in organizational relationships, and makes
recommendations for improvements.
The provision would also require the Secretary to submit a
separate report to the congressional defense committees on
DOD's views on the findings of the NAPA report not later than
120 days after the date on which the NAPA report is submitted.
The committee notes that development of an effective,
multi-tier missile defense capability to protect the United
States, its allies, and U.S. forces in theater is a critical
national security priority. Managing this capability, which
requires a complex interplay of space-based, airborne,
terrestrial, and maritime sensors, communications networks, and
kinetic and non-kinetic defenses, is further complicated by the
vast array of options available to adversaries for attacking
U.S. and allied territory and assets. In order to be
successful, all organizations that contribute to the missile
defense mission must have a clear understanding of one
another's roles and responsibilities, and confidence that all
such organizations are effectively executing said roles. Absent
a clear understanding of missile defense roles and
responsibilities, inefficiencies begin to inevitably plague the
system, resulting in redundant or unproductive investments,
unclear lines of authority, degradations in mission
performance, and parochialism--all of which are unacceptable
for such an important mission. As the Department of Defense
undertakes a review of missile defense policies and strategies,
whether as part of a stand-alone Missile Defense Review or as
part of a larger assessment of defense strategy, the Department
should thoroughly review its organizational structures for the
missile defense mission, clarify roles and responsibilities
across its components, and establish clear management
relationships and processes.
In order to ensure a comprehensive assessment, the
committee expects that the Office of the Under Secretary of
Defense for Policy will serve as the focal point for
facilitating DOD cooperation with NAPA in executing this
independent assessment and ensuring robust participation by all
DOD components. The committee also expects the Office of the
Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, in coordination with
Washington Headquarters Services, to expedite the conclusion of
DOD's contractual arrangements with NAPA not later than
February 1, 2022. Finally, the committee expects the Secretary
to promptly notify the committee if the DOD will be unable to
conclude a contract with NAPA by said timeline.
Items of Special Interest
Alternate position, navigation, and timing in space
Given the concern about the vulnerability of jamming of
Global Positioning System (GPS) satellites, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide a briefing to
the congressional defense committees, not later than March 31,
2022, on an alternate Positioning, Navigation, and Timing (PNT)
constellation that provides the capabilities for the rapid
deployment of alternate PNT satellites to address emerging
threats to GPS jamming and spoofing.
Briefing on advanced missile defense technology development
The committee believes that while the current kinetic hit
to kill interceptor construct represents the most capable,
cost-effective missile defense option in the near to mid-term,
pursuing this approach alone is unlikely to remain a cost
effective solution for protecting the U.S. Homeland, allies,
and U.S. forces abroad from increasing missile threats. As
such, the committee is concerned by the Missile Defense
Agency's lack of sufficient investment in the fiscal year 2022
request for exploring and developing future, cost-effective
missile defense technologies to address the range of hypersonic
glide, ballistic, cruise missile, and shorter range rocket
concerns.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Research & Engineering and the Director of the
Missile Defense Agency to provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees, not later than April 15,
2022, on Department of Defense efforts to prioritize
development of new communication technologies and sensors
critical to hypersonic, cruise, and ballistic missile
strategies; adopt agile commercial-sector practices in
developing next-generation missile-defense systems while
incorporating proven technologies and methodologies into the
warfighter integration process; incorporate directed energy
technology on a transportable and/or mobile platforms; and
provide the chief architect of the Missile Defense Agency with
threat development and modeling and simulation tools that
provide timely dynamic and reactive threat representations
required for architecture assessment and design.
Briefing on Air Force efforts to facilitate intercontinental ballistic
missile movements during the transition to the Ground-Based
Strategic Deterrent
The committee recognizes that the Ground-Based Strategic
Deterrent (GBSD) program is a complex undertaking, and the
successful completion of which will require a large number of
intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) movements across the
Malmstrom, Minot, and F.E. Warren Air Force Bases to facilitate
the successful transition from the existing Minuteman III
weapon system. Such efforts will necessarily require the use of
civilian roads and highways in adjacent communities in addition
to on-base infrastructure. As such, the committee encourages
the Air Force to closely consult with local civic leaders and
community stakeholders as it finalizes planning for updating
the ICBM force.
Further, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees, not later than March 1, 2022, on the status of its
plans for managing ICBM movements during the transition from
Minuteman III to the GBSD, including any expected roadway
improvements required to facilitate the safe transport of ICBMs
in and around the communities adjacent to the three ICBM bases.
Briefing on alignment of Missile Defense Agency's space development
activities
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
briefing to the congressional defense committees on whether
those personnel and programmatic activities performing space
functions within the Missile Defense Agency should be aligned
under the Space Force given that the development of such
payloads is inherently a space mission. The briefing shall be
due not later than March 31, 2022.
Briefing on protection of Air Force nuclear storage facilities
The committee notes that the Air Force is commencing
recapitalization of nuclear weapons storage and generation
facilities at select Air Force bases. The security of these
storage facilities is paramount. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Air Force to brief the
congressional defense committees on the security technology and
associated procedures utilized on these planned facilities not
later than March 31, 2022.
Commercial cloud computing in military space programs
The committee recognizes the importance of the collection,
transport, processing, and dissemination of large quantities of
data for space operations as well as the range of challenges
associated with these activities. The committee further
recognizes and commends the efforts of the U.S. Space Force to
build itself as a digital service, embracing the best of
commercial and government technologies to remain a quick, agile
organization. The committee believes that the use of commercial
cloud services for military space programs merits further study
and, as appropriate, rapid adoption.
Therefore, the committee directs the U.S. Space Force Chief
Technology and Innovation Officer, in coordination with the
Commander of the Space and Missile Systems Center and the
Department of Defense Chief Information Officer, to provide a
briefing to the congressional defense committees, not later
than October 1, 2021, on how the Space Force will leverage
modern cloud computing technologies for space programs and
systems. The plan should include:
(1) An inventory of current space programs with a
description of how the activities do or do not leverage
cloud-based technologies;
(2) Opportunities to increase modern commercial cloud
technology adoption, including full and open
competitions for industry providers;
(3) Challenges or impediments related to adoption of
such technology;
(4) Timelines and resources required to execute the
plan for cloud-technology adoption for space programs;
and
(5) Challenges and risks associated with relying on
such commercial cloud technology for critical space
systems.
Commercial Space Technologies
The committee recognizes that U.S. commercial remote
sensing capabilities serve an important national security
function for the Department of Defense and the Intelligence
Community. Timely, accurate geospatial intelligence (GEOINT)
and satellite imagery is integral to the safety and
effectiveness of our Nation's warfighters. The committee
supports programs and exercises that leverage commercial GEOINT
satellites and automatic target recognition systems using the
latest artificial intelligence capabilities. As such, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense, not later than
March 31, 2022, to provide a briefing to the congressional
defense committees that provides an assessment of opportunities
to enhance the integration of commercial capabilities into
current and planned Sensor-to-Shooter programs.
Cybersecurity of Missile Defense Systems
The committee believes that it is extremely important that
the Department of Defense (DOD) is ensuring that the missile
defense system is ready for warfighter use and is maintained in
such a manner as to maximize day to day readiness in the event
of an attack against the United States.
Operational cybersecurity testing is intended to identify
cyber vulnerabilities, examine potential attack paths, evaluate
operational cyber defense capabilities, and identify the
potential operational mission effects (e.g., loss of critical
operational capability) in a cyber-threat environment while
conducting operational missions. Persistent Cyber Operations
(PCO) consist of emulation of adversarial cyberattacks
conducted by National Security Agency-certified cyber red teams
over the lifetime of a system or network in order to find and
fix mission critical cyber vulnerabilities. PCO assessments
have found a number of previously undetected critical
vulnerabilities, resulting in fixes that have reduced the
potential for adverse mission effects.
The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) completed all fiscal year
2020 Operational Capability Baseline decisions without
information from operational cybersecurity testing.
Additionally, some elements of the Ballistic Missile Defense
System (BMDS) have not undergone persistent cyber operations
once fielded. Absent a clear understanding of the cyber
vulnerabilities and potential operational mission effects of a
cyberattack, the MDA cannot be certain that the system can
successfully accomplish its mission in the hands of the
warfighter under realistic cyber-threat conditions.
The Government Accountability Office, the DOD's Director of
Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E), and the BMDS
Operational Test Agency team (OTA) have previously identified
shortfalls in MDA's cybersecurity testing for both planned and
currently deployed capabilities. DOT&E and BMDS OTA have made
recommendations to address shortfalls in MDA's cyber testing.
The committee believes it is extremely important that these
valuable national security assets are adequately protected
against cyber-threats, and that the current cybersecurity
testing approach is insufficient to ensure operational
assurance. The committee strongly encourages the MDA to rectify
these shortfalls in identifying and addressing cybersecurity
vulnerabilities.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Director of the MDA,
in consultation with the DOT&E, to provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees, not later than November 30,
2021, on the MDA's plan to conduct persistent cyber operations
across all networks and systems supporting the BMDS, and to
complete operational cybersecurity testing prior to the
declaration of a new missile defense operational capability
baseline. The plan shall include:
(1) An inventory of all networks and systems that
support the BMDS;
(2) A strategy for coordinating with the applicable
combatant commands on persistent cyber operations, and
to have the DOT&E monitor and review these operations
and provide independent assessments of their adequacy
and sufficiency;
(3) A strategy to ensure that operational capability
baseline decisions incorporate results from operational
cybersecurity testing;
(4) How the MDA will respond to cybersecurity testing
recommendations made by DOT&E and BMDS OTA; and
(5) The timeline required to execute the plan.
Detection Capability of Homeland Defense Radar-Hawaii
The committee directs the Director of the Missile Defense
Agency, in consultation with the Commander, U.S. Indo-Pacific
Command, to provide a briefing not later than January 31, 2022,
to the congressional defense committees on the current threats,
future threats, and the capability that Homeland Defense Radar-
Hawaii provides against future threats.
Geophysical detection of nuclear proliferation
The committee notes that there are four primary nuclear
explosion monitoring technologies: radionuclide collection and
seismic, hydroacoustic, and infrasound waveform detection and
identification. Waveform data are derived from recording the
movement of energy that certain events generate and propagate
as seismic, hydroacoustic, or acoustic waves through the Earth,
oceans, or atmosphere. Sensors are deployed globally and in
strategic configurations to target specific regions of the
Earth and atmosphere.
To escape international nuclear explosion monitoring
detection, potential proliferators may explosively test smaller
nuclear yields that remain below current monitoring detection
thresholds in buried and sealed chambers that largely prevent
radionuclide collection and definitive attribution. Ongoing
efforts to detect lower yields often overwhelm existing data
processing systems and human analytical capabilities,
particularly with the incorporation of machine learning and
``big data.'' Aside from nuclear explosions monitoring, sensors
also typically process and analyze earthquake, volcanic
activity, and other natural geophysical sources. Most other
man-made seismic and acoustic detections are eliminated from
the dataset as ``noise,'' despite the potential of these
datasets to help detect and identify relevant aircraft,
missiles, and, potentially, vehicle traffic. Uncertainty
associated with the detection and characterization of seismic
acoustic events is also poorly understood, yet critical for
successful implementation.
The committee therefore directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Defense Programs
to provide a report on enhancing U.S. global nuclear detection
capabilities to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate
and the House of Representatives, not later than September 30,
2022. The report should explore the following:
(1) Using new or existing local or regional seismic
acoustic networks to increase detection probability and
characterization of low-yield nuclear detonations;
(2) Developing artificial intelligence and machine
learning tools to assist with data management and
increase event analysis accuracy, specificity, and
speed;
(3) Creating automated seismic acoustic detection and
analytical solution linkages to existing and developing
domain awareness and command and control systems; and
(4) Developing waveform catalogues that facilitate
the detection, location, and characterization of global
non-nuclear tactical or strategic events of interest.
Integrated satellite communications strategy
The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to
provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on
the integrated satellite communications enterprise strategy
integrating commercial and military satellite communications
architectures to be submitted with the budget request for
fiscal year 2023. The briefing on the enterprise strategy shall
be provided to the committees not later than March 31, 2022.
The briefing should outline requirements for an integrated
commercial and military satellite communications infrastructure
including:
(1) A quantifiable assessment of the requirements and
capabilities commercial satellite providers must meet
to supplement fixed military bandwidth needs and plans
to institutionalize these requirements in future years;
(2) The Department of Defense's plans to ensure
efficient acquisition of commercial satellite
communications and incentivize commercial industry and
international partners in their partnerships with the
Department, including a review of which requirements
can be met by commercial providers, or revised to allow
commercial participation, in compliance with section
2377 of title 10, United States Code;
(3) A comparative evaluation of non-traditional or
innovative methods for buying satellite communication
capabilities based on demand. Such an evaluation shall
consider both:
(a) Prior inefficiencies resulting from the
Department's historical and inefficient
practice of contracting with commercial
providers on an ad hoc basis; and
(b) Various alternative satellite
communications acquisition methods, including
consumption-based models, as examined by
previous pilot programs and pathfinders; and
(4) An investment plan across the future years
defense program to implement the strategy, including
ground infrastructure modernization.
Laser threats to low earth orbit constellations
The committee believes that stakeholders in the national
security community need a coordinated strategy to counter the
threat of lasers against space assets in low earth orbit (LEO)
in order to secure the benefits of those assets. Accordingly,
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in consultation
with the Director of National Intelligence and supported by the
Space Force, National Reconnaissance Office, and other
stakeholders as may be identified, to provide a briefing, not
later than March 31, 2022, to the congressional defense and
intelligence committees that identifies: (1) Plans to collect,
consolidate, and characterize laser activity data of potential
U.S. adversaries; and (2) Plans to mitigate the effects of that
activity to LEO space architectures.
Long-term oversight of the Department of Defense's efforts to deploy
Overhead Persistent Infrared space-based architectures
Through fiscal year 2025, the Space Force plans to spend
over $14.0 billion to acquire a follow-on to the Space Based
Infrared System, called Next Generation Overhead Persistent
Infrared (OPIR). The Air Force plans to use an accelerated
middle-tier acquisition process to rapidly develop an initial
block (Block 0) of five Next Generation OPIR satellites and
associated ground capabilities, with fielding to begin in
fiscal year 2025. Development of these satellites is to focus
on core strategic missile warning requirements. The Space Force
plans for a follow-on block (Block 1) that would begin fielding
satellites in the 2030s, in a yet-to-be determined
architecture, to enhance and provide additional capabilities.
Moreover, the Space Development Agency, Missile Defense Agency,
and Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency are pursuing the
development of low Earth orbit satellites with OPIR sensors
that could detect and track additional threats, such as
hypersonic missiles, with initial satellites to be launched
over the next several years. Analysis is currently underway on
integrating these efforts into the follow-on Block 1
architecture.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a
report on June 3, 2020, titled ``Defense Acquisitions Annual
Assessment: Drive to Deliver Capabilities Faster Increases
Importance of Program Knowledge and Consistent Data for
Oversight'' (GAO-20-349), that stated the Block 0 Next
Generation OPIR system is at high risk of schedule delays and
consequent cost increases. Given the high cost of developing
and fielding OPIR systems and the importance of the missions
these systems are to support, it is important for the committee
to understand the extent to which the Department of Defense
(DOD) is effectively coordinating and executing its OPIR
acquisition efforts, including how DOD is addressing risks that
imperil meeting cost, schedule, and performance goals.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to periodically review: (1) The status of DOD
OPIR programs to determine the extent to which they are on-
track for delivering needed capabilities and meeting schedule
milestones and cost estimates; and (2) How DOD is identifying
and mitigating risks within and across the efforts to help
ensure mission success. To facilitate GAO's reviews, DOD shall
provide to the Comptroller General quarterly, or other timely,
periodic component, systems, or program-wide risk assessments
for each OPIR program, to include risk items the program is
tracking; risk likelihood and consequence ratings; and risk
mitigation and specific plans, schedules, and updates for
addressing, mitigating, or resolving these risks. To mitigate
any burden this may pose, the Department is encouraged to work
with the Comptroller General, or designee, to identify existing
documentation that can be shared to meet these purposes. For
each review, the Comptroller General shall provide GAO's
findings to the congressional defense committees in a briefing
on a date mutually agreed on by the Comptroller General and the
congressional defense committees and, as deemed appropriate,
provide a report to the congressional defense committees.
Mix of media study audit
The Department of Defense (DOD) relies on satellite
communications (SATCOM) to support a variety of critical
mission needs such as surveillance performed by unmanned aerial
vehicles and communications between commanders and field units.
DOD meets its SATCOM needs through a mix of military and
commercial SATCOM to support land, sea, air, and space
operations. In 2014, the Defense Information Systems Agency
completed a SATCOM Mix-of-Media (MoM) study to examine the
planned mix of wideband, narrowband, protected, and commercial
SATCOM to meet user requirements in the 2018-2030 time frame
and to inform future investments. This was a follow-up to a
prior MoM study completed in 2010. Given changes in the DOD's
planned SATCOM needs since 2014, it is unclear whether data
resulting from the 2014 study are still relevant in helping the
DOD prioritize SATCOM investments and plan for future
requirements. Further, it is unknown whether the DOD has plans
to update the previous study with more recent SATCOM usage and
requirements inputs to reflect current and anticipated
warfighter needs.
The committee believes it is important for the DOD to have
an accurate representation of current and planned SATCOM
capabilities and estimates of warfighter needs to enable the
DOD to determine how best to satisfy such needs. Consequently,
the committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to: (1) Determine the extent to which the DOD uses data
from its 2014 study and whether such data remain relevant for
the DOD's SATCOM planning efforts; (2) Identify whether the DOD
has plans to update the existing study or use other forecasting
methodologies in its place, and if so, review the planned
inputs and rationales the DOD plans to use in its update; and
(3) Review any other relevant issues the Comptroller General
deems appropriate.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to brief
preliminary observations to the congressional defense
committees not later than March 31, 2022, with final report to
be delivered on a date agreed upon with the committees.
Responsive launch prize
The committee directs the Chief of Space Operations to
provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees, not
later than February 28, 2022, on the feasibility of using the
prize authority found under section 2374a of title 10, United
States Code, for launch responsiveness to replace key national
security satellites and reconstitute essential constellations
during a conflict. The briefing shall include options that push
existing launch capabilities to the technological limit in
areas of payload size, number of payloads, and launch sites,
with an emphasis on varied and survivable locations.
Review of Ballistic Missile Defense Readiness and Sustainment
For over half a century, the Department of Defense (DOD)
has funded efforts to defend the United States from ballistic
missile attacks. From 2002 to 2019, the Missile Defense Agency
(MDA) received approximately $162.0 billion to develop the
Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS). The BMDS--recently
renamed the Missile Defense System (MDS)--consists of diverse
and highly complex land-, sea-, and space-based systems and
assets located across the globe. For years, the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) has annually reviewed the cost,
schedule, testing, and performance of the BMDS and its varied
elements. However, it has been more than 10 years since GAO
last assessed the sustainment and readiness of the BMDS.
The committee believes that it is extremely important that
the DOD is ensuring that the MDS is ready for warfighter use
and has been maintained in such a manner as to maximize day to
day readiness in the event of an attack against the United
States.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to undertake a review of MDA programs and
activities for sustaining the MDS and maintaining system
readiness. At a minimum, the Comptroller General's review shall
address the following questions:
(1) To what extent has DOD identified and addressed
readiness challenges affecting the MDS;
(2) To what extent has DOD identified and addressed
sustainment challenges with major elements of its MDS;
and
(3) To what extent has DOD identified, addressed, and
budgeted for the maintenance and sustainment of its
future MDS force structure needs?
The Comptroller General shall provide a briefing to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the status of this review not later than
June 1, 2022, with a report to be provided at a time mutually
agreed upon by the committees and the Comptroller General.
Space Force Combatant Commander Integrated Command and Control System
The Space Force's Combatant Commanders' Integrated Command
and Control System (CCIC2S) was a program intended to modernize
and integrate existing and legacy systems for air, missile, and
space warning capabilities. These capabilities are critical to
ensuring the safety and security of the U.S. Homeland. Started
in 2000, the CCIC2S program experienced significant challenges
leading to large cost increases and performance shortfalls,
similar to challenges faced by programs that were predecessors
to CCIC2S. More recently, the Space Force has been planning how
to modernize and enhance the CCIC2S capabilities, including
conducting an analysis of alternatives to help determine the
best way forward.
Considering the Department of Defense's past challenges in
modernizing its command and control system capabilities, the
committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States
to review: (1) The status of planning for and implementing
efforts to modernize and enhance CCIC2S capabilities; (2) Key
challenges these efforts face and how the Space Force is
addressing them; and (3) How the U.S. Space Command is
validating the requirements and planning efforts of the Space
Force to modernize and enhance CCIC2S capabilities. The
committee directs the Comptroller General to brief its
preliminary observations to the congressional defense
committees not later than March 31, 2022.
Tactical satellite commutations capability
The committee recognizes that space is an increasingly
contested domain and that large geostationary satellites are
vulnerable to interference or destruction. The committee is
encouraged that the Department of Defense is researching and
developing tactical satellite communications capabilities that
are resilient, inexpensive, and can provide high-throughput
communications across a wide range of frequencies on demand.
The committee encourages the U.S. Space Force to consider the
development and deployment of small, flexible communications
satellites that meet connectivity and reconstitution
objectives.
Tactically Responsive Space Launch
The committee continues to emphasize the critical need for
the Department of Defense (DOD) to develop an enduring, robust
program to execute tactically responsive space launch. The
committee notes that in the William M. (Mac) Thornberry
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public
Law 116-283), the Congress directed DOD to establish a
Tactically Responsive Space Launch program to enable space
responsiveness and to fund it over the future years defense
program. To facilitate the implementation of tactically
responsive launch operations, the committee recommends the
Department implement and conduct multiple tactically responsive
launch demonstrations missions to support both unclassified and
classified mission areas that would benefit from rapid space
reconstitution, space augmentation, and the ability to launch
without dependence on fixed launch sites.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense and the
Director of National Intelligence, not later than January 31,
2022, to provide a briefing to the congressional defense and
intelligence committees on a plan, including an acquisition
strategy, to operationalize the ability of the United States to
rapidly respond to threats to satellites, launch sites, and
launch systems within operational timeframes, leveraging the
commercial launch and space industry in support of national
security space objectives. Additionally, the briefing shall
include manufacturing capabilities necessary to integrate
tactically responsive space launch with large-scale digital
manufacturing techniques capable of producing rapid, on demand
custom solutions.
Use of commercial space-based Intelligence, Surveillance, and
Reconnaissance by the combatant commands
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and
the U.S. Space Force Chief of Space Operations, to provide to
the congressional defense committees, not later than March 31,
2022, a detailed briefing on the commercial space-based
Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) needs of
the combatant commands including through various weather
phenomenon. The briefing shall include, but not be limited to:
(1) A description of current space-based ISR requirements of
the combatant commands and what subset of the requirements
could be met with commercial capability; (2) An analysis of how
the Department is or will be leveraging commercial space-based
solutions to meet combatant commanders' requirements over the
next 5 years; (3) What in the Department's strategy to address
these needs is similar to the Mix-of-Media Study performed for
the purchase of commercial satellite communications (SATCOM);
(4) An assessment of risks of over-reliance on commercial
space-based ISR in a time of conflict in space and other
domains; (5) An assessment of combatant commands' ability to
directly task space-based ISR for their respective areas of
interests; and (6) An assessment as to whether the Chief of
Space Operations of the Space Force, in consultation with the
Commander of U.S. Space Command, can economically and
competitively make bulk purchases of commercial spaced-based
ISR for the combatant commands similar to bulk purchases of
commercial SATCOM.
B-52 Commercial Engine Replacement Program (CERP)
The committee is aware that the B-52H bomber fleet's TF33-
09PW-103 engines are becoming increasingly difficult to sustain
due to obsolete technologies and will become unsustainable by
2030. Accordingly, replacing the engines with a modern system
is necessary to achieve the Air Force's long-term plans for the
B-52 to remain in service through 2050. Moreover, the
installation of new engines and subsystems will improve
reliability, maintainability, and supply additional electrical
power generation capabilities with application for emerging
requirements. Additionally, while the replacement engines are
expected to have similar size, weight, and thrust
characteristics, the incorporation of modern technology will
provide operational benefits, including extended range and
loiter capabilities as well as increased fuel efficiency. The
committee expects the Air Force to keep it fully informed of
developments relating to cost, schedule, and program execution
for this effort.
Multi-actor deterrence methodology
As the global security landscape becomes more challenging,
competitive, and characterized by multipolarity, the committee
believes new methodologies and models to assess complex multi-
actor interactions will be of increasing value and have
particular application to deterrence frameworks. Further, the
committee is aware of a growing body of academic work in this
field that could benefit policymakers. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the
congressional defense committees not later than March 31, 2022,
on the development of new tools to enhance the Department's
ability to assess and understand multi-actor relationships
related to deterrence, including the use of, where appropriate,
university affiliated research centers with expertise in this
area.
Intelligent electronic protection technologies
The committee notes that ensuring reliable and resilient
positioning, navigation, and timing systems is critical to
national security. The committee encourages the Secretary of
the Army to continue to leverage artificial intelligence and
machine learning to provide real time situational awareness
data to maintain operational capabilities.
Global Nuclear Landscape
The committee believes the Defense Intelligence Agency's
(DIA's) 2018 Global Nuclear Landscape report provides unique
value as an unclassified summary of foreign nations' nuclear
weapons-related capabilities. Additionally, the committee notes
with concern the rapid changes occurring in foreign nuclear
weapons programs and believes there is a sustained need for
unclassified assessments in this regard. Accordingly, the
committee directs the Director of the DIA to submit to the
congressional defense committees and congressional intelligence
committees, not later than December 1, 2022, and biennially
thereafter for the following 6-year period, an unclassified
report on the nuclear weapons-related capabilities, programs,
infrastructure, and doctrine of the Russian Federation, the
People's Republic of China, and the Democratic People's
Republic of Korea, as well as any other nations the Director
deems appropriate.
Report on mitigating the impact of space debris
In 2007, China conducted an anti-satellite test against an
inoperable Chinese satellite in low earth orbit (below 1,000
Km) generating over 3,000 pieces of debris, some of which will
remain in orbit for centuries. In 2013, one of the pieces of
debris collided with a Russian satellite severely damaging it.
In 2017, another piece of debris passed within 6 Km of the
International Space Station. In 2009, a Russian military
communications satellite collided with an Iridium satellite at
11,700 meters per second, generating over 2,000 pieces of
debris greater than 10 cm into a low earth orbit. On March 24,
2012, one of those pieces of debris passed within 120 meters of
the International Space Station causing six crew members to
take refuge inside the two docked Soyuz rendezvous spacecraft.
During a May 26, 2021, Strategic Forces Subcommittee hearing on
``space force, military space operations, policy and
programs,'' the Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Space
Policy stated that while most countries respond to inquiries
for possible space conjunction, ``there are two countries that
often do not pick up the phone or answer the email, and what we
are trying to focus on is your basic safety.'' When asked which
two countries did not pick up the phone, the answer was ``our
good friends Russia and China.''
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in consultation with other elements of the Executive Branch, as
needed, to report to the congressional defense committees not
later than April 31, 2022, on efforts to ensure adequate
communications are present between the United States and Russia
and China to mitigate future conjunctions on a timely basis.
The report shall include actions by both official and non-
governmental efforts to date with recommendations that can be
taken in the short and long term to avoid conjunctions and in
particularly U.S. national security satellites.
National Security Space Launch emerging requirements
Over the past 10 years the committee has worked with the
Department of Defense and the Air Force in particular to re-
structure what was once a sole source program into one that is
competitive and consistent with the foundations of section 2273
of title 10, United States Code, ``Policy regarding assured
access to space national security payloads,'' which requires
``at least two space launch vehicles (or families of space
launch vehicles) capable of delivering into space any payload
designated by the Secretary of Defense or the Director of
National Intelligence as a national security payload.'' This
has resulted in two phases of the National Security Space
Launch program with hundreds of millions of dollars in savings
to the taxpayer for inserting critical national security
payloads into space with high mission assurance. Based on the
Phase II National Security Space Launch Program, the Department
of the Air Force is now developing a Phase III launch
solicitation in the 2025 timeframe. Accordingly, the committee
believes it is important for the Department to consider the
next steps in transformational heavy launch based on the
lessons and success--and savings to the taxpayer of Phases I
and II of the National Security Space Launch Program.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force submit to the congressional defense committees a report,
not later than April 30, 2022, detailing the following
elements: an analysis of the benefits of competing national
security space launches to accelerate the rapid development and
on-orbit deployment of the technologies required to address
emerging requirements that include new payloads larger than
currently deployed under Phase II; innovative solutions to
accelerate national security space launch heavy-lift
capability; satellite ride-sharing or mixed manifest payloads;
other new missions outside the parameters of the existing nine
design reference missions in Phase II; and other requirements
the Secretary of the Air Force considers appropriate. In
addition, the report shall include a discussion on potential
acquisition frameworks to enable a path that could allow new
launch providers to seek national security launch
certification; promote open and sustainable competition for
Phase III of an acquisition strategy for the National Security
Space Launch Program; and reduce the timeline for capability
development and on-orbit deployment by prioritizing processes
that encourage smart risk taking. Finally, the report shall
include an analysis of the extent to which the Phase III
program would contribute to a continued reduction in the cost
per launch of national security payloads.
The committee notes that the heavy lift launch market is
now undergoing a transformational shift and expects the Air
Force and the Department of Defense as a whole to promote this
transformation and reap the benefits that are occurring now and
in the future. The committee hopes that this report will lay
the ground work for the path the Air Force will begin to
undertake as it shapes the Phase III National Security Space
Launch Program.
High energy laser technology integration
The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense is
making gains in the use of various high energy laser
technologies such as fiber and slab lasing mediums for high
power coherent beams. Given these recent improvements in lasing
technologies, and the concomitant potential for improving the
cost effectiveness of future air and missile defense systems--
particularly in counter-raid scenarios--the committee believes
that the Secretary of Defense should emphasize, where
appropriate, the integration of high-energy laser technology in
carrying out the planning for, and execution of, research and
development activities for future air and missile defense
systems.
Leveraging commercial space domain awareness capability, data, products
and services
The committee notes that with the rapid increase in
commercial activities in space, there has been a corresponding
increase in the commercial capability to track objects in
space. Previous National Defense Authorization Acts have
provided direction to leverage these commercial space domain
awareness capabilities. Therefore, the committee directs the
Commander, U.S. Space Command, to provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees, not later than March 31,
2022, on progress made to use commercial space domain awareness
capabilities.
TITLE XVI--CYBERSPACE-RELATED MATTERS
Matters concerning cyber personnel requirements (sec. 1601)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to conduct an assessment to determine the
overall cyber and information operation civilian and military
personnel and education requirements of the Department of
Defense. The provision would require a briefing not later than
November 1, 2022, and a report not later than January 1, 2023,
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House
of Representatives on the findings of the assessment required
by the provision, an implementation plan to achieve the
civilian and military personnel requirements of the Department,
such recommendations as the Secretary may have for meeting
personnel needs in the cyber and information operation domain,
and such legislative or regulatory action as the Secretary
considers necessary to meet personnel requirements.
Cyber data management (sec. 1602)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Principal Cyber
Advisor to the Secretary and the Department of Defense (DOD)
Chief Information Officer, to develop a cyber data management
strategy not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act. The strategy would cover data acquired
from DOD intelligence and counterintelligence components,
including the National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command
(CYBERCOM), as well as DOD cybersecurity service providers,
cyber threat information from industry and other Government
agencies, and data gathered from comprehensive collection
within the DOD Information Network (DODIN). The provision would
require the Secretary to develop processes or operating
procedures governing the ingest, structuring, and storage of
such intelligence data, cyber threat information and DODIN
sensor, tool, routing infrastructure, and endpoint data in Big
Data Platform instances, relevant Cyber Operations Force
systems, relevant CYBERCOM commercial cloud enclaves, and other
DOD data lakes containing information pertinent to CYBERCOM
missions. The Secretary would also be required to develop a
strategy for piloting efforts, operational workflows, and
tactics, techniques, and procedures for the operational use of
mission data by the Cyber Operations Force.
In addition, the provision would require the Secretary to
establish, not later than 270 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the specific roles and responsibilities
of DOD officials and components in implementing each of the
provision's enumerated tasks and to provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees not later than 300 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act.
Assignment of certain budget control responsibilities to Commander of
United States Cyber Command (sec. 1603)
The committee recommends a provision that would assign to
the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, responsibility for directly
controlling and managing the planning, programming, budgeting,
and execution of the resources to train, equip, operate, and
sustain the Cyber Mission Forces, subject to the authority,
direction, and control of the Principal Cyber Advisor of the
Department of Defense. The provision would not assign to the
Commander responsibility for military pay and allowances and
funding for facility support provided by the military services.
The provision would also require various elements of the
Department to develop an implementation plan for the transition
of budgetary responsibilities described in the provision to the
Commander, U.S. Cyber Command. Finally, the provision would
require the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees on the implementation plan,
not later than 90 days after the enactment of this Act or the
date on which the implementation plan is completed, whichever
is earlier.
Coordination between United States Cyber Command and private sector
(sec. 1604)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, to establish a voluntary process
for engaging with the commercial information technology and
cybersecurity companies to explore and develop methods of
assistance or coordination to protect against foreign malicious
cyber actors. The provision would require the Commander to
provide briefings, at least annually through March 1, 2026, on
the status of any activities conducted under this section to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives.
Pilot program on public-private partnerships with internet ecosystem
companies to detect and disrupt adversary cyber operations
(sec. 1605)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish and commence a pilot program
to assess the feasibility and advisability of entering into
voluntary public-private partnerships with internet ecosystem
companies to facilitate actions by such companies to discover
and disrupt the use of the platforms, systems, services, and
infrastructure of such companies by malicious cyber actors. The
provision would also require the Secretary of Defense to
provide two briefings, not later than 1 year and 540 days,
respectively, to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate
and the House of Representatives on the pilot program.
The committee is concerned that foreign cyber actors and
major cyber criminal organizations are operating with near
impunity on cyber infrastructure and services provided by U.S.
internet and information technology companies. The committee
notes that components of the Department of Defense (DOD) have
unique and extensive technical and operational expertise
regarding the ways in which such threat actors utilize such
platforms and services to threaten the Department of Defense,
the Government as a whole, and critical infrastructure
supporting national security. The committee also believes that
the companies providing this information technology
infrastructure and services are also quite sophisticated in
their understanding of the ways in which their platforms and
services are being utilized for malicious cyber activities. The
committee believes that partnerships between the Department and
leading service providers could substantially improve the
Nation's cybersecurity by making it much harder for foreign
cyber actors to conduct operations on this infrastructure. The
committee stresses that the DOD's role would be limited to
sharing information and technical insights with partner
companies.
Zero trust strategy, principles, model architecture, and implementation
plans (sec. 1606)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Chief Information Officer (CIO) of the Department of Defense
(DOD) and the Commander, Joint Forces Headquarters-Department
of Defense Information Network (JFHQ-DODIN), to jointly develop
a zero trust strategy and a model architecture for the DODIN,
including classified networks, operational technology, and
weapon systems.
The provision would also require the heads of the military
departments and DOD Components to develop detailed
implementation plans for the zero trust strategy and model
architecture and submit the plans to the DOD CIO and the
Commander, JFHQ-DODIN, for certification.
The provision would also require briefings on the zero
trust architecture and strategy and implementation plans to the
congressional defense committees and updates on the
implementation of zero trust architecture by the DOD and
service CIOs during the annual cybersecurity budget review
briefings.
The committee remains concerned about the Department's slow
adoption of zero trust principles and supports efforts to
engender a Department-wide cybersecurity paradigm shift towards
embracing critical elements of a zero trust architecture,
including identity, credential, and access management; macro
and micro network segmentation; least privilege access
controls; and endpoint cybersecurity.
Demonstration program for automated security validation tools (sec.
1607)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Chief Information Officer (CIO) of the Department of Defense
(DOD), acting through the Director of the Defense Information
Systems Agency, to complete a demonstration program to
demonstrate and assess an automated security validation
capability to assist the DOD by: (1) Mitigating cyber hygiene
challenges; (2) Supporting DOD efforts to assess weapon system
resiliency; (3) Quantifying enterprise security effectiveness
of enterprise security controls to inform future acquisition
decisions; (4) Assisting portfolio managers with balancing
capability costs and coverage; and (5) Supporting the DOD
Cybersecurity Analysis and Review threat framework. The
provision would also require the CIO to provide briefings to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the demonstration pilot. The committee
encourages the Department to build advanced capabilities to
test the cybersecurity vulnerabilities of the DOD information
networks.
Improvements to consortium of universities to advise Secretary of
Defense on cybersecurity matters (sec. 1608)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1659 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) to designate the National
Defense University College of Information and Cyberspace as the
administrative chair of the consortium to advise the Secretary
of Defense on cybersecurity matters and allow the Secretary to
form an executive committee for the consortium.
The provision would also require the Secretary to consult
with the consortium not less than twice annually, or as
regularly as agreed by the Secretary and the consortium, and
the provision makes conforming amendments.
The committee commends the Department of Defense on its
efforts to advance the University Consortium for Cybersecurity
as required by the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020. The committee believes that the Department
has made significant progress on a path forward to achieve the
committee's intent for the Department to leverage the
capabilities of academic institutions to help gain and maintain
cutting edge cybersecurity information and products. The
committee encourages the Department to continue progress on its
envisioned use of a university consortium to leverage the
broadest possible subset of academic institutions in support of
Department cybersecurity requirements, to include its
envisioned use of a university to perform consortium support
activities.
The committee continues to recognize that an increase in
national cybersecurity education, training, and workforce
development efforts is necessary to counter the growing threats
posed by advanced persistent cyber actors. The committee
strongly supports the education and research programs in
cybersecurity and critical infrastructure protection that exist
at the academic institutions that have been designated as Cyber
Centers of Academic Excellence for cyber operations, cyber
research, and cyber defense. The committee believes that these
institutions can provide a diverse workforce pipeline to meet
the Nation's cybersecurity needs and encourages the Department
of Defense to continue looking for opportunities to utilize
these academic institutions further.
Quarterly reports on cyber operations (sec. 1609)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 484 of title 10, United States Code, to require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a quarterly report, in addition
to a quarterly briefing, on all offensive and significant
defensive military operations in cyberspace carried out by the
Department of Defense to the congressional defense committees.
The committee believes that the ability to conduct regular
and continuous oversight of sensitive military cyber operations
rests on timely and appropriately detailed information from the
Department. Recent quarterly operations briefings have covered
only a portion of the information required in section 484 of
title 10, United States Code. As a result, the committee
believes that receiving an accompanying report containing all
of the required information is necessary to enable the
committee to understand the risks, benefits, and consequences
of sensitive military operations.
Assessment of cybersecurity posture and operational assumptions and
development of targeting strategies and supporting capabilities
(sec. 1610)
The committee recommends a provision that would require an
assessment, not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, by the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command,
Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, and the Under Secretary
of Defense for Intelligence and Security of the current and
emerging offensive cyber posture of adversaries of the United
States and the current operational assumptions and plans of the
military services for offensive cyber operations during
potential crises or conflict.
The provision would also require the Commander to develop
targeting strategies, supporting capabilities, and operational
concepts and to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees, not later than 30 days after completing the
activities. Finally, the provision would require, not later
than 1 year after the previous activities are completed,
country-specific access strategies for the Russian Federation,
the People's Republic of China, the Democratic People's
Republic of Korea, and the Islamic Republic of Iran. The
Commander would provide briefings of these strategies to the
Deputy Secretary of Defense, the Vice Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, and the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives.
Assessing capabilities to counter adversary use of ransomware tools,
capabilities, and infrastructure (sec. 1611)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a comprehensive assessment of
the policy, capacity, and capabilities of the Department of
Defense (DOD) to diminish and defend the United States from
ransomware threats. The provision would also require a briefing
to the congressional defense committees on the results of the
assessment not later than April 1, 2022.
The committee notes that the 2018 DOD Cyber Strategy states
``the Department seeks to preempt, defeat, or deter malicious
cyber activity targeting U.S. critical infrastructure that
could cause a significant cyber incident regardless of whether
that incident would impact DoD's warfighting readiness or
capability. Our primary role in this homeland defense mission
is to defend forward by leveraging our focus outward to stop
threats before they reach their targets. The Department also
provides public and private sector partners with indications
and warning (I&W) of malicious cyber activity, in coordination
with other Federal departments and agencies.'' The committee
encourages DOD to think broadly about how its expansive cyber
capabilities could be applied to the growing ransomware threat.
Comparative analysis of cybersecurity capabilities (sec. 1612)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Principal Cyber Advisor to the Secretary of Defense and the
Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, in
consultation with the Chief Information Officers and Principal
Cyber Advisors of each of the military departments, to jointly
sponsor a comparative analysis, conducted by the Director of
the National Security Agency and the Director of the Defense
Information Systems Agency, of various tools, applications, and
capabilities offered as options on enterprise software
agreements for cloud-based productivity and collaboration
suites compared to similar tools, applications, and
capabilities currently deployed in Department of Defense (DOD)
Components or required under the DOD zero trust reference
model. The provision would also specify a set of criteria for
the comparative analysis and require a briefing to the
congressional defense committees not later than 30 days after
the completion of the assessment.
Report on the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification program (sec.
1613)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report, not later than January
15, 2022, to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives on the plans of the Secretary for
the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification program in
consideration of the recent internal review of the program and
recent efforts by the Secretary to improve the cybersecurity of
the defense industrial base.
The committee is concerned that previous efforts of the
Department of Defense to improve Defense Industrial Base (DIB)
cybersecurity have focused primarily on assessing the
compliance of the DIB companies with standards, while devoting
insufficient attention and resources on other essential actions
required to improve DIB cybersecurity. The committee continues
to encourage the Department to adopt a comprehensive approach
to DIB cybersecurity, as required by section 1648 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public
Law 116-92), particularly in addressing how to improve the
cybersecurity of small and medium businesses. The committee
believes that approaches to improve DIB cybersecurity should
take into account the mission-critical supply chains that
require the highest level of cybersecurity.
The committee also believes that the approach should
address methods to assist DIB companies with improving their
cybersecurity protections, including assistance with the
development, deployment, and operation of automated
cybersecurity tools suitable for actively monitoring their
networks, systems and data. The committee notes in this regard
the Army's prototype cybersecurity operations center that is
directly helping a large cross-section of DIB suppliers for
critical Army programs.
Report on potential Department of Defense support and assistance for
increasing the awareness of the Cybersecurity and
Infrastructure Security Agency of cyber threats and
vulnerabilities affecting critical infrastructure (sec. 1614)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
not later than 270 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, that provides recommendations on how the Department of
Defense can improve support and assistance to the Cybersecurity
and Infrastructure Security Agency to increase awareness of
threats and vulnerabilities affecting domestic networks that
are critical infrastructure, including infrastructure that is
critical to the Department and to the defense of the United
States.
Deadline for reports on assessment of cyber resiliency of nuclear
command and control system (sec. 1615)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 499(c) of title 10, United States Code, to clarify the
submission process and timeline of the required reports.
Items of Special Interest
Advanced capabilities for Department of Defense red teams
The committee believes that it is important for the
Department of Defense (DOD) to build advanced capabilities to
test the cybersecurity vulnerabilities of the Department
through the use of cyber red teams. The committee is also aware
that there is a current shortage of appropriately skilled cyber
red teams within the Department to meet the growing needs for
these vulnerability assessments. Therefore, the committee
believes that the Department should take actions to increase
the supply of qualified cyber red team operators to meet the
needs of the Department.
The committee is aware of the findings and recommendations
identified by the Department from the assessment required by
section 1660 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92). The provision required
the Department to conduct a joint assessment of cyber red team
capabilities, capacity, demand, and future requirements that
affect the Department's ability to develop, test, and maintain
secure systems. The committee encourages the Department to
ensure that the findings and associated recommendations from
the assessment are quickly adopted.
Accordingly, the committee directs the DOD Principal Cyber
Advisor and the Principal Cyber Advisors of each military
department to provide a briefing to the congressional defense
committees, not later than March 1, 2022, on the status of the
actions taken to address the recommendations from the
assessment. The briefing should also include an update from
each military department providing: (1) Plans to improve the
capabilities of their respective cyber red teams; (2) Plans to
sustain and grow their cyber red teams, as necessary; and (3) A
complete breakout of all funding designated for cyber red team
efforts within their department, including funding for
development and training of cyber red teams.
Application of commercial off-the-shelf solutions to address
intelligence and operations gaps
The committee is encouraged by Joint Force Headquarters--
Department of Defense Information Network's (JFHQ-DODIN) rapid
adoption of a commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) solution for the
continuous monitoring and management of DOD internet-facing
systems and assets and the rapid discovery of anomalies in or
threats to their activities on the internet. The COTS solution
enabled JFHQ-DODIN to observe DOD networks from the outside as
assets communicate on the internet, enabling network managers
to understand what their external attack surfaces look like and
how elements of their networks behave externally. This has
significantly contributed to JFHQ-DODIN's abilities to conduct
defensive cyber operations and secure the DODIN.
The committee notes that U.S. Cyber Command (CYBERCOM)
lacks a similar capability for continuous, near real-time
visibility and attribution of foreign adversary internet-
connected systems and assets and their activities. This lack of
visibility limits CYBERCOM's ability to effectively plan,
prepare, and conduct cyber operations. COTS solutions, like
those adopted by JFHQ-DODIN and the U.S. Navy's Fleet Cyber
Command, could immediately provide CYBERCOM with the
situational awareness to continuously enumerate the cyber
infrastructure of foreign adversaries and enable CYBERCOM to
plan and conduct operations to disrupt, deny, or degrade
adversary operations as necessary. These COTS solutions can
provide continuously refreshed internet landscape data and
machine learning-enabled graphing algorithms to attribute the
cyber infrastructure with the adversary organizations to which
they belong. The committee encourages CYBERCOM to explore the
further application of these COTS solutions across the
command's mission space as a solution for rapidly addressing
urgent intelligence and operations gaps.
Assessment of need for Cyber Intelligence Center and War Game Center
The committee is concerned that the cyberspace domain,
unlike the well-established land, maritime, air, and space
warfighting domains, does not have a dedicated technical
intelligence center nor a principal joint wargaming center.
Regarding the potential need for a dedicated entity to gather
and analyze foundational and scientific and technical (S&T)
intelligence for cyberspace, the committee notes that the
cyberspace domain is as technically complex as other domains
and remains less understood. With respect to wargaming, the
lessons of history suggest that without imaginative war gaming
and exercises, new warfighting means, such as armored vehicles,
carrier aviation, and submarines, have often been mistakenly
applied to supporting existing forces and operational concepts
rather than perceived as the basis for new types of independent
operations.
The Cyber Mission Force (CMF) requires intelligence and
analysis support to enable access development. The committee
believes that a Cyberspace Technical Intelligence Center could
provide the resources for order of battle development, target
system analysis, and vulnerability analysis for targets that
use or are wholly located within the cyberspace domain. Unlike
other domains, which have dedicated intelligence organizations,
intelligence production required to support global and regional
Department of Defense cyberspace operations is distributed
amongst numerous intelligence and analysis centers. Each center
suffers from competing priorities for resources to meet the
requirements of its respective service, service acquisition
customers, combatant commands, and Defense and national-level
policy-makers. As adversaries continue to take advantage of new
technology, the committee is concerned that the distributed
production of cyberspace intelligence and analysis is limiting
the Department's ability to understand and take action in the
global and regional security environment.
There are a large number of wargaming centers across the
military departments' war colleges and intelligence and
research and development laboratories, the Office of the
Secretary of Defense, and the federally funded research and
development centers and university-affiliated research centers.
Many of these existing centers conduct war games with various
aspects of cyberspace operations based on the war game sponsor.
The committee is concerned about duplication of effort and
believes that the Department of Defense may need to establish a
center of gravity for joint cyberspace and information warfare
wargaming, modeling, and simulations that will better inform
future cyberspace operations forces design and development.
The committee, therefore, directs the Deputy Secretary of
Defense and the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to
assess and make recommendations on whether there is a need to
(1) Establish a cyberspace foundational and S&T intelligence
center; (2) Focus the Department's cyberspace wargaming
activities and capabilities; and (3) Enhance the Department's
cyberspace operations models and simulations. In conducting
these assessments, the Deputy Secretary and the Vice Chairman
shall consult with the offices of the Under Secretaries of
Defense for Policy, Intelligence and Security, Acquisition and
Sustainment, and Personnel and Readiness; the Commander of U.S.
Cyber Command; the Chief Information Officer, and the Director
of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation. The Deputy Secretary
and the Vice Chairman shall provide a briefing to the
congressional defense and intelligence committees on the
conclusions and recommendation of the assessments not later
than January 31, 2022.
Comptroller General assessment of the Department of Defense information
technology supply chain
The committee notes that recent cyber incidents adversely
impacting government and private sector networks demonstrate
the serious threat that sophisticated adversaries pose to the
supply chains associated with information and communications
technology (ICT) products and services, including software
updates.
The committee understands that supply chain risk management
(SCRM) is the process of identifying, assessing, and mitigating
the risks associated with the global and distributed nature of
ICT product and service supply chains. In December 2020, the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report,
titled ``Federal Agencies Need to Take Urgent Action to Manage
Supply Chain Risks'' (GAO-21-171), that found non-DOD Federal
agencies had not implemented foundational practices for
managing ICT supply chain risks. In March 2021, GAO also issued
a report, titled ``Federal Government Needs to Urgently Pursue
Critical Actions to Address Major Cybersecurity Challenges''
(GAO-21-288), on 5G national security issues, to include 5G
supply chain issues.
In view of recent cyber incidents and GAO's findings for
non-Department of Defense (DOD) agencies, the committee is
concerned about the extent to which DOD is addressing ICT
supply chain risks in a timely manner. Therefore, the committee
directs the Comptroller General of the United States to provide
the congressional defense committees with an assessment of
DOD's efforts to address ICT supply chain risks. The assessment
shall:
(1) Identify and highlight threats and risks to DOD's
ICT supply chain;
(2) Assess the extent to which DOD is implementing
foundational ICT SCRM practices;
(3) Assess the extent to which DOD is leading or
supporting government-wide efforts to protect the ICT
supply chain; and
(4) Include any other matters the Comptroller General
determines to be relevant.
The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees on
preliminary findings not later than June 15, 2022, and to
submit a final report to the congressional defense committees
at a date agreed to at the time of the briefing.
Cybersecurity training at Critical Training Centers
The committee recognizes the critical role that the Army
Interagency Training and Education Center (AITEC) plays in
training both military and civilian personnel in protecting
critical infrastructure. The committee also recognizes that
cyber is part of the Nation's critical infrastructure. With the
increase of cyber threats, the Department of Defense must
utilize all available resources to enhance cybersecurity
efforts, which includes bolstering the role that the National
Guard plays in this field. The committee encourages the
Department to examine expanding the role of existing critical
infrastructure training centers, such as AITEC, to include
cybersecurity in their training program. It is important that
the Department continues to further the cybersecurity
capabilities and training of the National Guard in order to
help mitigate and prevent cyber-attacks on domestic soil.
Improving Department of Defense guidance for weapon system acquisitions
cybersecurity requirements
The committee believes that strengthening the cybersecurity
of Department of Defense (DOD) weapon systems in the face of
increasingly sophisticated cyber threats is critical to the
DOD's ability to achieve its mission across all warfighting
domains. The committee is aware that in December 2020, the DOD
issued a new acquisition policy, DOD Instruction 5000.90, that
outlines cybersecurity requirements for acquisition programs
across the DOD's acquisition pathways and directs DOD
organizations to ensure that cybersecurity requirements are
incorporated throughout an acquisition program's life cycle,
from high-level capabilities to detailed specifications.
While this policy is an important component of the DOD's
efforts to strengthen the cybersecurity of its weapon systems
and acquisition programs, the committee is aware of a
Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, titled ``Weapon
System Cybersecurity: Guidance Would Help DOD Programs Better
Communicate Requirements to Contractors'' (GAO-21-179),
published March 4, 2021, that indicated that more detailed
instruction is needed to assist acquisition program offices in
meeting these requirements. The report found that the DOD
lacked specificity on how weapon systems acquisition programs
should develop cybersecurity requirements and incorporate them
in acquisition contracts and recommended that the DOD include
in its acquisition program contracts well-defined cybersecurity
requirements with clear criteria and mechanisms for how the
Government will verify that a system meets its needs.
Based on GAO's findings and the critical need to protect
DOD weapon systems from cyber threats, the committee is
concerned that existing cybersecurity and requirements guidance
for acquisition program officials is insufficient. Therefore,
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to establish a
working group to review and propose updates to DOD and
component acquisition policy and guidance on cybersecurity
requirements for weapon systems acquisitions. The working group
shall be chaired by the Office of the Under Secretary Defense
for Acquisition and Sustainment and include representatives
from the DOD's operational and developmental testing
organizations and military service acquisition and
cybersecurity organizations. Consistent with GAO's findings,
the working group should propose updates that would assist
weapon systems acquisition programs in determining how to
incorporate cybersecurity requirements, acceptance criteria,
and verification processes in contracts. These updates should
seek to define a baseline level of consistency, while ensuring
components have flexibility to tailor policies and guidance to
the needs of their acquisition communities. The Secretary of
Defense shall provide a report to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives not
later than December 31, 2021, on the status of these efforts,
including specific proposals for updating policy and guidance.
Prioritizing cyber vulnerability remediations
The Department of Defense (DOD) continuously monitors its
networks to detect known vulnerabilities, associated with a
known set of severity criteria, in hosts, nodes, systems, and
applications. DOD also has tools: to discover assets on its
networks and determine their patching and configuration status;
for quarantining devices and applications that are not in
compliance; and for remediating non-compliant assets. However,
the pace of discovery of vulnerabilities exceeds the
Department's capacity for remediation, and the Department lacks
an effective capability for judging the relative importance of
its network assets to enable risk-based decisions about
remediation priorities.
The committee believes that network mapping and mission
thread analyses are essential for situational awareness and to
make risk-based decisions about vulnerability remediation.
However, the committee understands that the DOD does not
routinely perform either of these activities. The committee is
aware that commercial network management tools are available to
map networks and to trace packets, while identifying devices
and assets and their latency encountered on network paths. The
committee believes that such capabilities could materially
assist in mission thread definition and asset prioritization.
The committee directs the Commander, of Joint Force
Headquarters, DOD Information Network (JFHQ-DODIN), who serves
simultaneously as the Director of the Defense Information
Systems Agency (DISA), to identify and partner with the head of
a DOD component whose network enclave can access commercial
network management tools such as those described above for
network mapping and mission path traceroute. The Commander
JFHQ-DODIN/Director DISA and the participating component head
shall jointly assess the utility and cost-benefits of using
these capabilities to make risk-based vulnerability remediation
decisions, identify key cyber terrain and assets, identify
single-node mission dependencies, and monitor for changes in
mission thread execution.
The committee directs that the Commander/Director to
provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives on the plan for the
assessment by September 30, 2021, and on the commencement of
the assessment by November 4, 2021. The Commander/Director and
the participating component head shall jointly brief the
committees on the results of the assessment by February 1,
2022.
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
Summary and explanation of funding tables
Division B of this Act authorizes funding for military
construction projects of the Department of Defense (DOD). It
includes funding authorizations for the construction and
operation of military family housing as well as military
construction for the reserve components, the Defense Agencies
and Field Activities, and the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization Security Investment Program. It also provides
authorization for the base closure accounts that fund military
construction, environmental cleanup, and other activities
required to implement the decisions made in prior base closure
rounds. It prohibits any future base realignment closure
rounds.
The tables contained in this Act provide the project-level
authorizations for the military construction funding authorized
in division B of this Act and summarize that funding by
account.
The fiscal year 2022 budget requested $9.8 billion for
military construction and housing programs. Of this amount,
$7.9 billion was requested for military construction, $1.4
billion for the construction and operation of family housing,
$284.6 million for base closure activities, and $205.9 million
for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment
Program.
The committee recommends the authorization of
appropriations for military construction, housing programs, and
base closure activities totaling $9.8 billion. The total amount
authorized for appropriations reflects the committee's
continued commitment to investing in the recapitalization of
DOD facilities and infrastructure.
Short title (sec. 2001)
The committee recommends a provision that would designate
division B of this Act as the ``Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022.''
Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be specified by
law (sec. 2002)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
the expiration date for authorizations in this Act for military
construction projects, land acquisition, family housing
projects and facilities, and contributions to the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program as
October 1, 2024, or the date of the enactment of an Act
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2025, whichever is later.
Effective date (sec. 2003)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide an
effective date for titles XXI through XXVII of October 1, 2021,
or the date of the enactment of this Act, whichever is later.
TITLE XXI--ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Summary
The budget request included authorization of appropriations
of $834.7 million for military construction and $398.8 million
for family housing for the Army for fiscal year 2022.
The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of
$910.4 million for military construction for the Army and
$398.8 million for family housing for the Army for fiscal year
2022.
Further details on projects authorized can be found in
section 2101 and section 4601 of this Act.
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2101)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the active component of the
Army for fiscal year 2022. The committee recognizes the
Department of Defense's significant unfunded military
construction requirements and has included an additional $753
million for many of these projects here. The authorized amount
is listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
Family housing (sec. 2102)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
new construction, planning, and design of family housing units
for the Army for fiscal year 2022. This provision would also
authorize funds for facilities that support family housing,
including housing management offices, housing maintenance, and
storage facilities.
Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2103)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the active component military construction
and family housing projects of the Army authorized for
construction for fiscal year 2022. This provision would also
provide an overall limit on the amount authorized for military
construction and family housing projects for the active
component of the Army. The state list contained in this report
is the binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Extension of authorization of fiscal year 2017 project at Wiesbaden
Army Airfield (sec. 2104)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization contained in section 2101(b) of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328) for a project at Wiesbaden Army Airfield, Germany, until
October 1, 2023, or the date of the enactment of an Act
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2024, whichever is later.
Additional authority to carry out fiscal year 2018 project at Fort
Bliss, Texas (sec. 2105)
The committee recommends a provision that would allow the
Secretary of the Army to carry out a military construction
project to construct a defense access road at Fort Bliss,
Texas, using funds appropriated under section 131 of the
Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2018 (title I of division J of Public Law
115-141) for the Defense Access Road Program.
Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 2021 project at Fort
Wainwright, Alaska (sec. 2106)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
authorization contained in section 2101(a) of the William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) for the construction of an
unaccompanied enlisted personnel housing building at Fort
Wainwright, Alaska, to include 104,300 square feet to
incorporate a modified standard design as well as an outdoor
recreational shelter, sports fields and courts, a barbecue and
leisure area, and fitness stations associated with the
unaccompanied enlisted personnel housing.
Additional authority to carry out fiscal year 2022 project at Aberdeen
Proving Ground, Maryland (sec. 2107)
The committee recommends a provision that would allow the
Secretary of the Army to carry out a military construction
project to construct a 6,000-square-foot recycling center to
meet the requirements of a qualified recycling program at
Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland. The provision would allow
the Secretary to use funds generated pursuant to section 2667
of title 10, United States Code, as well as funds appropriated
for unspecified minor military construction.
TITLE XXII--NAVY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Summary
The budget request included authorization of appropriations
of $2.4 billion for military construction and $435.0 million
for family housing for the Department of the Navy for fiscal
year 2022.
The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of
$2.3 billion for military construction for the Navy and $435.0
million for family housing for the Navy for fiscal year 2022.
Further details on projects authorized can be found in
section 2201 and section 4601 of this Act.
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2201)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Navy and Marine Corps military construction projects for fiscal
year 2022. The committee recognizes the Department of Defense's
significant unfunded military construction requirements and has
included an additional $1.7 billion for many of these projects
here. The authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis.
Family housing (sec. 2202)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
new construction, planning, and design of family housing units
for the Navy for fiscal year 2022. This provision would also
authorize funds for facilities that support family housing,
including housing management offices, housing maintenance, and
storage facilities.
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Navy to improve existing family housing
units of the Department of the Navy in an amount not to exceed
$71.9 million.
Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the active component military construction
and family housing projects of the Department of the Navy
authorized for construction for fiscal year 2022. This
provision would also provide an overall limit on the amount
authorized for military construction and family housing
projects for the active components of the Navy and the Marine
Corps. The state list contained in this report is the binding
list of the specific projects authorized at each location.
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Summary
The budget request included authorization of appropriations
of $2.1 billion for military construction and $441.2 million
for family housing for the Air Force in fiscal year 2022.
The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of
$2.0 billion for military construction for the Air Force and
$441.2 million for family housing for the Air Force for fiscal
year 2022.
Further details on projects authorized can be found in
section 2301 and section 4601 of this Act.
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition projects (sec.
2301)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Air Force military construction projects for fiscal year 2022.
The committee recognizes the Department of Defense's
significant unfunded military construction requirements and has
included an additional $538.3 million for many of these
projects here. The authorized amounts are listed on an
installation-by-installation basis.
Family housing (sec. 2302)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
new construction, planning, and design of family housing units
for the Air Force for fiscal year 2022. This provision would
also authorize funds for facilities that support family
housing, including housing management offices, housing
maintenance, and storage facilities.
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Air Force to improve existing family
housing units of the Department of the Air Force in an amount
not to exceed $105.3 million.
Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the active component military construction
and family housing projects of the Air Force authorized for
construction for fiscal year 2022. This provision would also
provide an overall limit on the amount authorized for military
construction and family housing projects for the active
component of the Air Force. The state list contained in this
report is the binding list of the specific projects authorized
at each location.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2017 projects (sec.
2305)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization contained in section 2301 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) for
seven projects until October 1, 2023, or the date of the
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military construction
for fiscal year 2024, whichever is later.
Extension of authorizations of fiscal year 2017 projects at Spangdahlem
Air Base, Germany (sec. 2306)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization contained in section 2902 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) for
two projects at Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany, until October 1,
2023, or the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds
for military construction for fiscal year 2024, whichever is
later.
Extension of authorization of fiscal year 2017 project at Hanscom Air
Force Base, Massachusetts (sec. 2307)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization contained in section 2301 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) for
a project at Hanscom Air Force Base, Massachusetts, until
October 1, 2022, or the date of the enactment of an Act
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2023, whichever is later.
Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 2018 project at
Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida (sec. 2308)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
authority contained in section 2301(a) of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) for
the construction of a fire station at Tyndall Air Force Base,
Florida, to include up to 3,588 square meters of crash rescue
or structural fire station.
Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 2020 projects at
Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida (sec. 2309)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
authorization contained in section 2912(a) of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-
92) for the construction of certain projects at Tyndall Air
Force Base, Florida.
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Summary
The budget request included authorization of appropriations
of $2.0 billion for military construction for the Defense
Agencies for fiscal year 2022.
The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of
$2.0 billion for military construction for the Defense Agencies
for fiscal year 2022.
Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land acquisition projects
(sec. 2401)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Defense Agencies for
fiscal year 2022. The committee recognizes the Department of
Defense's significant unfunded military construction
requirements and has included an additional $66.0 million for
many of these projects here. The authorized amounts are listed
on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment Program
projects (sec. 2402)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to carry out energy conservation
projects. The committee recognizes the Department of Defense's
significant unfunded military construction requirements and has
included an additional $161.7 million for many of these
projects here. The authorized amounts are listed on an
installation-by-installation basis.
Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies (sec. 2403)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the military construction and family housing
projects of the Defense Agencies authorized for construction
for fiscal year 2022. This provision would also provide an
overall limit on the amount authorized for military
construction and family housing projects for the Defense
Agencies. The state list contained in this report is the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Extension of authorization of fiscal year 2017 project at Yokota Air
Base, Japan (sec. 2404)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization contained in section 2401 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) for
a project at Yokota Air Base, Japan, until October 1, 2023, or
the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds for
military construction for fiscal year 2024, whichever is later.
TITLE XXV--INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS
Summary
The Department of Defense requested authorization of
appropriations of $599.1 million for military construction in
fiscal year 2022 for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Security Investment Program and in-kind contributions from the
Republic of Korea and the Republic of Poland. The committee
recommends authorization of appropriations for the requested
amount.
Subtitle A--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment
Program
Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2501)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to make contributions to the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program in an
amount equal to the sum of the amount specifically authorized
in section 2502 of this title and the amount of recoupment due
to the United States for construction previously financed by
the United States.
Authorization of appropriations, NATO (sec. 2502)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations of $205.9 million for the U.S. contribution to
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Security
Investment Program (NSIP) for fiscal year 2022.
This provision would also allow the Department of Defense
construction agent to recognize the NATO project authorization
amounts as budgetary resources to incur obligations when the
United States is designated as the host nation for the purposes
of executing a project under the NSIP.
Subtitle B--Host Country In-Kind Contributions
Republic of Korea funded construction projects (sec. 2511)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to accept five military construction
projects totaling $356.2 million from the Republic of Korea as
in-kind contributions.
Republic of Poland provided infrastructure projects (sec. 2512)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to accept two military construction
projects totaling $37.0 million from the Republic of Poland as
in-kind contributions.
Authorization to accept contributions from the Republic of Korea in the
form of an irrevocable letter of credit (sec. 2513)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to accept contributions from the
Republic of Korea in the form of an irrevocable letter of
credit for the construction of the Black Hat Intelligence
Fusion Center, Camp Humphreys, Republic of Korea, and for other
military construction projects within the Republic of Korea.
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES
Summary
The Department of Defense requested authorization of
appropriations of $670.0 million for military construction in
fiscal year 2022 for facilities for the National Guard and
reserve components.
The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of
$806.1 million for military construction in fiscal year 2022
for facilities for the National Guard and reserve components.
The detailed funding recommendations are contained in the state
list table included in this report.
Further details on projects authorized can be found in the
tables in this title and section 4601 of this Act.
Authorized Army National Guard construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2601)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Army National Guard for
fiscal year 2022. The committee recognizes the Department of
Defense's significant unfunded military construction
requirements and has included an additional $182.3 million for
many of these projects here. The authorized amounts are listed
on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized Army Reserve construction and land acquisition projects
(sec. 2602)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Army Reserve for fiscal
year 2022. The committee recognizes the Department of Defense's
significant unfunded military construction requirements and has
included an additional $58.4 million for one project. The
authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis.
Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2603)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Navy Reserve and Marine
Corps Reserve for fiscal year 2022. The authorized amounts are
listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized Air National Guard construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2604)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Air National Guard for
fiscal year 2022. The committee recognizes the Department of
Defense's significant unfunded military construction
requirements and has included an additional $182.2 million for
many of these projects here. The authorized amounts are listed
on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized Air Force Reserve construction and land acquisition projects
(sec. 2605)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
military construction projects for the Air Force Reserve for
fiscal year 2022. The committee recognizes the Department of
Defense's significant unfunded military construction
requirements and has included an additional $85.7 million for
one project here. The authorized amounts are listed on an
installation-by-installation basis.
Authorization of appropriations, National Guard and Reserve (sec. 2606)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for the reserve component military construction
projects authorized for construction for fiscal year 2022 in
this Act. This provision would also provide an overall limit on
the amount authorized for military construction projects for
each of the reserve components of the military departments. The
state list contained in this report is the binding list of the
specific projects authorized at each location.
TITLE XXVII--BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES
Summary and explanation of tables
The budget request included $284.6 million for the ongoing
cost of environmental remediation and other activities
necessary to continue implementation of the 1988, 1991, 1993,
1995, and 2005 base realignment and closure rounds. The
committee recommends $284.6 million for these efforts. The
detailed funding recommendations are contained in the state
list table included in this report.
Authorization of appropriations for base realignment and closure
activities funded through Department of Defense Base Closure
Account (sec. 2701)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2022 for ongoing activities that
are required to implement the decisions of the 1988, 1991,
1993, 1995, and 2005 base realignment and closure rounds.
Prohibition on conducting additional base realignment and closure
(BRAC) round (sec. 2702)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the Department of Defense from conducting another base
realignment and closure (BRAC) round.
The committee notes that, although the Department of
Defense did not request authorization to conduct a BRAC round
in the request for fiscal year 2022, the Department continues
to focus its efforts on studying facility optimization. The
committee is encouraged by these efforts and looks forward to
reviewing these results prior to the request for any future
BRAC round.
TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program
Clarification of establishment of the Office of Local
Defense Community Cooperation as a Department of Defense Field
Activity (sec. 2801)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 146 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify that
the Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation (OLDCC) is a
Field Activity within the Department of Defense.
Use of amounts available for operation and maintenance in carrying out
military construction projects for energy resilience, energy
security, or energy conservation (sec. 2802)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2914 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify that
operation and maintenance funding can be used for the Energy
Resilience and Conservation Investment Program, similar to
Military Installation Resilience projects enacted in the
William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283).
Subtitle B--Military Family Housing
Command oversight of military privatized housing as element of
performance evaluations (sec. 2811)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretaries of the military departments to ensure that
performance evaluations indicate the extent to which the
following individuals have or have not exercised effective
oversight and leadership of military privatized housing: (1)
Commanders of military installations with privatized military
housing; (2) Each officer or senior enlisted member whose
duties include facilities or housing management at such
installations; and (3) Any other officer or enlisted member as
specified by the secretary concerned.
Clarification of prohibition against collection from tenants of
privatized military housing units of amounts in addition to
rent and application of existing law (sec. 2812)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2891a of title 10, United States Code, to ensure that
privatized military housing providers cannot charge out-of-
pocket costs to servicemembers for housing unit upgrades needed
to comply with standards under the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA) (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.) for future projects.
Additionally, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a briefing not later than March 1, 2022, on
how the Department of Defense determines in privatized housing
legal agreements that five percent of newly constructed housing
units are ADA accessible or adaptable and whether or not the
Department believes this percentage should be changed in future
agreements.
Modification of calculation of military housing contractor pay for
privatized military housing (sec. 2813)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 606 of the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232) to
revise the calculation for payments for privatized housing
projects so that the payments are based on national average
rates, which would be consistent with the calculation for the
Basic Allowance for Housing rate reduction applied to
servicemembers.
Modification of requirements relating to window fall prevention devices
at military family housing (sec. 2814)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Department of Defense to begin retrofitting windows at existing
military family housing units with window fall prevention
devices or replace windows with ones that can be equipped with
such devices. The provision would also amend section 2879(a)(3)
of title 10, United States Code, to clarify that the approved
type of window fall prevention device is not a window opening
control device that can be disengaged.
Subtitle C--Land Conveyances
Land conveyance, St. Louis, Missouri (sec. 2821)
The committee recommends a provision that would grant
permissive authority to the Secretary of the Air Force to
convey approximately 24 acres of land in the City of St. Louis,
Missouri, to the Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority of
the City of St. Louis.
The committee notes that the exact acreage and legal
description of the property to be conveyed shall be determined
by a survey satisfactory to the Secretary of the Air Force and
the Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority of the City of
St. Louis.
Land conveyance, Saint Joseph, Missouri (sec. 2822)
The committee recommends a provision that would grant
permissive authority to the Secretary of the Air Force to
convey to the City of Saint Joseph, Missouri, approximately 54
acres of land at the Rosecrans Air National Guard Base for the
purposes of accommodating the operations and needs of the
Rosecrans Memorial Airport as well as development of the
parcels and buildings for economic purposes. The committee
notes that this permissive authority only takes effect at such
time that the Missouri Air National Guard vacates their
existing location on the southern end of the airfield at
Rosecrans Memorial Airport.
Land conveyance, Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point, North Carolina
(sec. 2823)
The committee recommends a provision that would grant
permissive authority to the Secretary of the Navy to convey
approximately 30 acres of land to the city of Havelock, North
Carolina.
Land conveyance, Naval Air Station Oceana, Virginia Beach, Virginia
(sec. 2824)
The committee recommends a provision that would grant
permissive authority to the Secretary of the Navy to convey
approximately 8 acres of land to the city of Virginia Beach,
Virginia.
Subtitle D--Other Matters
Consideration of public education when making basing decisions (sec.
2831)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2883 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-
283) to add certain public education criteria as an additional
military family readiness issue that must be considered in
making basing decisions associated with certain military units
and major headquarters.
Designation of facility at Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois (sec. 2832)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Army to designate a facility located in Rock
Island Arsenal, Illinois, to be named after Mr. Charles Carroll
Smith, in recognition of his significant public service
contributions. The committee notes that Mr. Smith, who passed
away on November 27, 2020, was a dedicated public servant and
an Army veteran. The committee further notes that Mr. Smith was
also a lifelong advocate for the State of Illinois, and in
particular, can be among those credited for the tremendous
growth at Rock Island Arsenal over the past decade.
Improvement of security of lodging and living spaces on military
installations (sec. 2833)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to assess and improve the security of
lodging and living spaces at military installations. The
provision would also require the Secretary to submit a report
to the congressional defense committees, not later than 270
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, on the
results of the assessment, including a cost estimate to make
any improvements recommended and an estimated schedule for
making such improvements.
Expansion of authority of Secretary of the Navy to lease and license
Navy museum facilities to generate revenue to support museum
administration and operations (sec. 2834)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2852 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2006 (division B of Public Law 109-163) to expand
the authority of the Secretary of the Navy to lease and license
Navy museum facilities to generate revenue to support museum
administration and operations.
Pilot program on establishment of account for reimbursement for use of
testing facilities at installations of the Department of the
Air Force (sec. 2835)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force to establish a pilot program, not
later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, to authorize not more than two Air Force installations
that are part of the Air Force Flight Test Center construct and
are currently funded for Facilities Sustainment, Restoration,
and Maintenance (FSRM) through Research, Development, Testing,
and Evaluation (RDT&E) accounts, to establish a reimbursable
account for the purpose of being reimbursed for the use of
testing on said installations.
The committee understands that certain Air Force testing
centers, such as the Arnold Engineering Development Complex at
Arnold Air Force Base, are being forced to forgo crucial
installation repairs to ensure that requested testing is
conducted. The committee further notes that the FSRM accounts
are historically underfunded and believes that the use of FSRM
out of RDT&E accounts could cause irreparable damage to the
facilities if maintenance is not addressed.
Items of Special Interest
Army mobilization and training infrastructure
Section 1712 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (Public Law 116-92) required the Commander,
U.S. Transportation Command to produce an updated Mobility
Capability Requirements Study and submit a report on his or her
analysis. The committee understands that the Commander will
submit the report later this year. Section 1712 required the
Commander to assess associated risks with respect to the
ability to conduct operations, considering programmed forces
and infrastructure.
According to Army officials and doctrine, rail is the most
cost-effective and expeditious means of moving large quantities
of materiel, such as tanks and ammunition, over long distances.
Further, Army officials also state that, during contingencies,
approximately 67 percent of Army unit equipment would move from
its fort or base of origin to a shipping port by rail. The
resources required to effect such a movement are sizeable as
well. The committee understands that an Army 2020 simulation of
deployment from a single fort in support of a large-scale
combat operation demonstrated: (1) The need for having more
than 2,200 rail cars available over a 3-day period; (2) The
need for more than 600 rail cars to move a single armored
brigade combat team; and (3) The need to have a sufficient
number of qualified rail operating crews and the availability
of well-maintained rail track over which the trains would
travel.
The committee expects the Army to program infrastructure
improvements to address any deficiencies identified in the
Mobility Capability Requirements Study and to consider any base
infrastructure improvements needed to support training for
National Guard armored and mechanized infantry personnel that
would be deployed in support of mobilization.
Army National Guard readiness centers
The committee notes that according to the Army National
Guard's Readiness Center Transformation Master Plan, the Army
National Guard relies on an inventory of over 2,500 Readiness
and Reserve Centers spread over all 54 States and territories
in local communities as the primary facilities to support unit
training and local State operations. To date, over 40 percent
of National Guard facilities are over 50 years old, and about
40 percent of readiness centers do not adequately meet
requirements for the support of training for the full range of
mission essential tasks. In addition, based on the current
force structure of the National Guard, there exists a deficit
in readiness centers of 19.5 million square feet, 30 percent of
the total current inventory. Finally, many readiness centers
are located in areas that are not ideally positioned for
current populations and demographic trends, which could
adversely affect recruiting and retention. All of these factors
have a detrimental impact on the readiness of the National
Guard at a time when the high operations tempo of deployments
is already taking a significant toll.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services
Committee, not later than March 1, 2022, that includes:
(1) A review of standards for facility size,
configuration, and equipment for the range of missions
and training supported by readiness centers;
(2) An assessment of readiness centers to objectively
measure and determine the current facility condition
and capability to support authorized manpower, unit
training, and operations;
(3) An assessment of supporting facilities and
functions, to include equipment storage, classrooms,
force protection, utilities, maintenance,
administration, and proximity of support and training
facilities;
(4) Recommendations for the placement of new
readiness centers, the relocation of existing readiness
centers, or a change in the mission of units assigned
to readiness centers to ideally position the National
Guard in current or projected population centers;
(5) Recommendations for enhanced use of readiness
centers to facilitate National Guard family support
programs during deployments;
(6) An analysis of the feasibility, potential costs,
and benefits of shared use of National Guard readiness
centers with other local, State, or Federal agencies to
improve response to local emergencies as well as the
community support provided by readiness centers; and
(7) An investment strategy and proposed funding
amounts in a prioritized project list to correct the
most critical facility shortfalls across the inventory
of National Guard readiness centers.
Army Training Land Retention Program
The committee supports the decision by the U.S. Army
Pacific to establish a program office, the Army Training Land
Retention (ATLR) Program, that would provide the necessary
continuity and expertise to ensure successful training land
management effort in Hawaii. The committee supports the
proposed structure of the ATLR program office, to be staffed
with a career civil servant(s), to coordinate the Army's land
acquisition efforts in the State of Hawaii, which will require
coordination and assistance from multiple entities across the
Army, the State of Hawaii, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, and the
local communities.
Accordingly, the committee directs the ATLR to brief the
Senate Armed Services Committee on the progress of this effort
as well as any changes to the structure or resource support for
the ATLR program with a 6-month update not later than September
30, 2021, and a 1-year update not later than March 15, 2022.
Briefing on feasibility of integrated project delivery for military
construction
The committee is aware of construction projects utilizing
an integrated project delivery (IPD) approach that incentivizes
collaboration between the owner, architecture/engineering firm,
constructor, subcontractors, and trade partners, in which
parties seek to jointly share risk, reward, and align interests
via a single multi-party agreement. This approach can
disincentivize claims or litigation between parties. The
committee understands that IPD is commonly used in the
international market, and its use is expanding in North
America, with a track record of delivering projects on time and
on budget.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment to brief
the Senate Armed Services Committee not later than March 1,
2022, on the Department of Defense's construction contract
approaches and determination if changes in project delivery
methods could improve project performance.
The briefing shall include, but not be limited to:
(1) A review of best practices in the construction
market from around the world with a special emphasis on
delivering large or complex projects;
(2) A summary of IPD's effectiveness in delivering
large and/or complex projects;
(3) An identification of construction projects, by
type, where an IPD approach would be feasible and
advantageous;
(4) A review of legislative and regulatory obstacles
to IPD and any associated recommendations; and
(5) A review of the training and experience of the
government managers responsible for delivery of complex
projects and identify shortfalls.
Child development centers
The committee notes that according to Department of Defense
Instruction 6060.02, installation Child Development Programs,
which includes Child Development Centers (CDCs), must be
certified to operate through inspections occurring not less
than 4 times a year. These inspections are unannounced and
include three local inspections and one higher headquarters
inspection. The local inspections include a multidisciplinary
inspection, annual comprehensive health and sanitation
inspections, and annual comprehensive fire and safety
inspections. The committee also notes that while life-
threatening violations must be remediated immediately, non-
life-threatening violations are eligible for a waiver that
waives the requirement that the violation is remedied
immediately for up to 90 days beginning on the date of
discovery of the violation. There is also a waiver to authorize
the program to remain open if the violation cannot be
reasonably be remedied within the 90-day period or in which
major facility reconstruction is required.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments,
to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee on
the results of the CDC program inspections. The briefing shall
be provided not later than March 1, 2022, and include, at a
minimum, the following:
(1) A list of life-threatening and non-life-
threatening violations recorded at CDCs over the last
three years, to include the installation where the
violation occurred and date of inspection;
(2) A list of what is considered a life-threatening
and non-life-threatening violation;
(3) How often the 90-day remediation requirement has
been waived and at which CDCs; and
(4) Data on CDC closures due to a non-life-
threatening violation not remedied within 90 days.
Additionally, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments, to provide the congressional defense committees
with a report listing CDCs considered to be in ``poor'' or
``failing'' condition. The report shall include a remediation
plan for each CDC by the respective military service and
delivered not later than March 1, 2022. The remediation plan
shall include:
(1) An estimate of the funding required to complete
the remediation plan;
(2) The Department's funding strategy to complete the
plan;
(3) Any additional statutory authorities the
Department needs to complete the remediation plan; and
(4) A plan to execute preventive maintenance on other
CDC facilities to prevent more from degrading to poor
or failing condition.
Comptroller General review of excess infrastructure
The committee understands that the Department of Defense
(DOD) has faced longstanding challenges in reducing
infrastructure that is excess to its needs. The committee notes
that operating and maintaining only those facilities needed to
meet mission requirements, and avoiding sustainment costs for
those that do not, help to conserve resources. Further, to the
extent that DOD has unneeded facilities not yet identified as
excess, consolidation or disposal of these facilities could
realize additional cost savings.
The committee appreciates the Government Accountability
Office's (GAO) work on excess property. This work includes a
series of reports with several recommended actions for DOD that
could improve its management of excess infrastructure, such as
improving the quality of its real property utilization and
condition data, demolition program planning, and excess
capacity estimates. While the Department acted to address most
of these recommendations, the committee is concerned that it
still needs to improve the accuracy of its real property data
to effectively inform future space consolidation, disposal, and
infrastructure investment decisions. Further, it is not clear
how well DOD has been using its existing authorities to
consolidate or dispose of excess facilities. DOD continues to
report excess facilities it does not fully use or need,
spending valuable resources that could be eliminated from its
budget or used for other purposes. As the committee believes a
Base Realignment and Closure round is not appropriate at this
time as the Department has not shown that the estimated savings
justify the actual costs, the Department should be using its
existing authorities to consolidate or dispose of excess
infrastructure when appropriate. The committee would like to
better understand how DOD uses these authorities to ensure that
its infrastructure is adequately sized to support its assigned
missions while minimizing the likelihood of unnecessary costs
to support excess capacity.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General
of the United States to review the Department's approach to
reducing its excess infrastructure. The findings of the review
shall be submitted to the committee not later than March 1,
2022, and answer, at a minimum, the following questions: (1)
What criteria and processes does DOD use to identify potential
and existing underutilized or excess infrastructure; (2) To
what extent does DOD plan for, manage, or dispose of
underutilized or excess space and to what extent is DOD meeting
any reduction goals; and (3) To what extent has DOD evaluated
the cost and mission impact of maintaining underutilized or
excess infrastructure?
Comptroller General review of military barracks
The committee notes its continued interest in the quality
of housing for servicemembers. While housing varies by rank,
location, and family situation, most Active Duty, Reserve, and
National Guardsmen and women start their military careers
living in barracks that consist of shared bunks and bathroom
facilities. Further, all of the military services require
single servicemembers with pay grades E-4 and below and with
less than 3 years of service to live in barracks, and the Army
and Marine Corps extend that requirement to the E-5 pay grade.
The committee also notes that when the Government
Accountability Office last reviewed the physical condition of
military barracks almost 20 years ago, it reported that most
barracks were in need of significant repair and suffered from
inadequate heating and air conditioning, inadequate
ventilation, and plumbing-related deficiencies. The committee
would like to better understand the current condition of
military barracks as well as the ongoing and planned
initiatives to maintain them.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General
of the United States to evaluate the condition of military
barracks operated and maintained by each of the military
services and to provide a report on such findings to the Senate
Armed Services Committee not later than March 1, 2022. The
report shall address, at a minimum, the following questions:
(1) How does the Department of Defense (DOD)
determine its military barracks requirements, including
construction, sustainment, and recapitalization
requirements;
(2) To what extent is the DOD achieving its military
barracks requirements, including construction,
sustainment, and recapitalization requirements;
(3) To what extent is the DOD assessing the effect of
its military barracks resource investment decisions on
individual and collective readiness and other
performance goals, such as re-enlistment targets; and
(4) To what extent is the DOD pursuing alternative
design, construction, and management approaches for its
military barracks programs?
Disaster recovery at Offutt Air Force Base and Tyndall Air Force Base
The committee understands that the Department of Defense is
still evaluating funding requirements associated with recovery
efforts at both Offutt Air Force Base and Tyndall Air Force
Base. The committee notes that no money was requested for such
efforts in fiscal year 2022 as a result of significant
appropriations in prior years, though additional funds will be
necessary to complete these multi-year projects. The committee
encourages the Department to continue to develop its
requirements, plans, and cost estimates in connection with
recovery activities and expects the Department to continue to
keep it fully apprised of progress relating to both projects.
Feasibility of relocating Yuma community site
The committee is concerned about a potential safety risk
posed by the significant overlap of the flight path for Marine
Corps Air Station Yuma and a public fairgrounds property that
frequently hosts large crowds throughout the year, including
the simultaneously scheduled weapons instructor course and
annual fair. The committee notes that current operations are
occurring in areas that may be inadvisably close to public and
commercial activity and is concerned this challenge may be
exacerbated by the added demand for airspace presented by 5th
generation fighters.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary
of the Navy for Energy, Installations, and Environment to
provide a briefing to the committee, not later than March 1,
2022, capturing any flight safety incidents or accidents in and
around the fairgrounds in the last 10 years. The briefing shall
include an assessment of the feasibility of relocating the
community fairgrounds to a location outside the flight path,
potential risk management benefits of such a move, and whether
the move could support future airspace needs of the
installation.
Fleet Readiness Center East and Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point
facilities brief
The committee notes that the Department of the Navy has
primary responsibility for Fleet Readiness Center (FRC) East
military construction requirements because of the facility's
status as a Navy tenant command aboard a Marine Corps
installation. FRC East is the depot-level repair and overhaul
facility that employs over 4,000 Federal civilians and
contractors. The committee further notes that Marine Corps Air
Station (MCAS) Cherry Point is the headquarters for the Second
Marine Aviation Wing. The committee understands that together
Cherry Point and FRC East generate nearly $2.0 billion in
regional annual economic impact.
The committee is concerned that the Navy has not
prioritized military construction projects at FRC East and MCAS
Cherry Point, which could lead to degraded readiness levels and
operational impacts. The committee understands that there are
discussions underway between the Department of the Navy and
local and State authorities on the creation of a public-private
partnership to construct a 1.5 million-square-foot Industrial
Production compound at FRC East. The committee further
understands that due to a depot service gap, additional
temporary hangars are needed for the F-35 depot program but are
not budgeted until fiscal year 2025.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary
of the Navy for Energy, Installations and Environment to
provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee, not
later than March 1, 2022, on areas of required improvements for
FRC East and MCAS Cherry Point by conducting:
(1) An assessment of the plan to use a public-private
partnership of FRC East, Marine Corps Installations
East, the State of North Carolina, and private
investors to construct a 1.5 million-square-foot
Industrial Production Compound at the FRC East campus
aboard Cherry Point that includes, but is not limited
to, a cost-benefit analysis, any legal concerns that
the public-private partnership could create, and an
analysis of alternatives and associated costs; and
(2) A review of the current requirement for F-35
hangars at MCAS Cherry Point, to include additional
temporary hangar facilities to cover a depot service
gap from fiscal year 2023 to fiscal year 2025. The
committee notes that Military Construction P-993 has an
operational need date of fiscal year 2023.
Additionally, current project objective memorandum
schedules have projected into fiscal year 2025. The
review shall include the location on the airfield and
determine what additional projects would be needed for
utilities, the size of temporary structure, and the
recommended structure and equipment costs.
General Mitchell International Airport pipeline project
The committee notes that the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA)
received $28.0 million for a fuel facility for the 128th Air
Refueling Wing at General Mitchell International Airport in
fiscal year 2019. In addition to the fuel facility, the
Congress also provided $2.4 million in Air National Guard
Facilities, Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization (FSRM)
funds to complete a pipeline enabling the fuel facility to
access over 1 million gallons of fuel from a pipeline
approximately 50 yards from the fuel facility. The committee
notes that the pipeline tap was funded separately by the
Congress due to the beneficial mission impact access to the
fuel reserves the pipeline connection brings to the Air Force
and the 128th Air Refueling mission.
The committee understands that delays in DLA's ability to
complete a construction contract for the fuel facility would
have resulted in the expiration of the FSRM funds. The
committee further understands that the fuel project was
originally slated for delivery in 2019 but is now scheduled for
fiscal year 2023 and that the delay was caused by receipt of
pricing proposals well in excess of the budget amount for fuel
facility. The committee notes that the National Guard obligated
the $2.4 million in fiscal year 2019 FSRM funds slated for the
pipeline tap with assurances that they would proceed with this
element of funding as the DLA construction schedule became more
firm.
The committee notes that obligation of those funds for this
purpose in the National Guard's FSRM account and the project's
completion remains an item of special interest.
Hawaii Infrastructure Readiness Initiative
The Hawaii Infrastructure Readiness Initiative (HIRI) is
the Army's long-term effort to modernize installations in
Hawaii through military construction funds. The U.S. Army
Pacific created HIRI to address readiness shortfalls in
aviation, operations, training, and munitions facilities at
Schofield Barracks, Wheeler Army Airfield, Pohakuloa Training
Area, and West Loch Ammunition Storage in Hawaii. The Army
committed to allocating $1.1 billion through fiscal year 2030
to address these priorities established in military
construction submissions and major restoration and maintenance
programming requests. The committee is concerned that competing
demands within the Army military construction plan may have
caused the deferral of several HIRI projects until later years.
Continued and consistent funding is needed for the Army to
continue to meet critical national defense missions in the
Indo-Pacific region.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services
Committee, not later than March 1, 2022, with a list of HIRI
projects for the next 5 fiscal years, the timeline for
completing these projects, and associated planning,
programming, and budgeting documents. The briefing shall also
assess the risk to the Army's readiness in the Indo-Pacific
region as well as those for the Commander of U.S. Indo-Pacific
Command if these HIRI projects are not funded.
Improving budgeting for barracks and dormitory in failing conditions
The committee notes that in recent years, an overdue,
renewed focus has been placed on the welfare and safety of
servicemembers and their families as it pertains specifically
to their living conditions. The committee drafted Title XXX in
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
(Public Law 116-92) to begin to rectify the years of negligence
by both the military departments and private housing
contractors. The committee notes that enlisted barracks account
for roughly 60 percent of the housing for junior
servicemembers. While the Department of Defense has taken
certain steps to resolve the concerns about privatized housing,
there remain other living quarters, such as barracks and
dormitories, that are in disrepair. Upon review of the
President's budget request for fiscal year 2022, the committee
is concerned that the Department is not making the necessary
infrastructure improvements to barracks and dormitories in the
base budget. The committee is further concerned that the
services are either heavily relying upon their respective
unfunded requirements lists to fund these items or have not
made them a priority at all.
The committee notes that one example of this obvious need
is at Vance Air Force Base, where the existing dormitory
facilities B421 and B423 were constructed in the 1950s and are
known to be contaminated with lead-based paint and asbestos-
containing material. The committee understands that the floor-
to-floor height of the existing facility does not have enough
vertical space to integrate contemporary building support
systems. As a result, the committee understands that the
limited interstitial space leads to difficulty in maintaining
and replacing mechanical components as well as issues with
condensation. The committee notes that condensation issues were
prevalent in many privatized housing work orders, which led to
repeated mold remediation calls at a high cost financially and
to the detriment of military families' health and well-being.
The committee also understands maintenance costs for B421 and
B423 exponentially increased by more than 500 percent from
fiscal year 2016 to fiscal year 2020. The committee further
notes that the fiscal year 2020 maintenance costs of these
facilities were almost double their planned sustainment
requirement.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of each
military department to submit to the Senate Armed Services
Committee, not later than February 1, 2022, a report outlining
the unfunded requirements for all barracks and dormitories
scheduled to be replaced through 2030. The Secretaries shall
provide the list in priority order by service and include for
each facility: (1) Current facility readiness or quality index
rating, along with an estimate of cost to repair versus cost of
replacement; (2) Annual sustainment costs by facility; (3) Cost
to replace the facility; and (4) Anticipated replacement date.
The report shall also: (1) Include the quantifiable backlog
of repair and modernization projects for barracks and
dormitories; and (2) Quantify the average completion time for
barracks maintenance requests.
Improving on-base housing waitlists
The committee understands that many military families have
undergone significant delays in conducting their permanent
change of station (PCS) due to COVID-19. Additionally, the
committee notes that there has been a significant housing
shortage exacerbated by the pandemic leading to extremely long
wait times for on-base military housing.
The committee recognizes the strides the Department of
Defense (DOD) has made concerning the housing shortage but
believes a DOD-wide policy to allow servicemembers to join on-
base housing waitlists upon being notified of a PCS, instead of
being permitted to join only after receiving orders, would be
welcomed by both families and the installation command. The
committee believes that additional time will provide the
installation commander a more accurate forecast of incoming
personnel while also giving servicemembers additional time for
a home to become available, reducing extended stays and
expenditures at temporary housing upon arrival.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Secretary of
Defense to instruct the military departments to issue guidance
allowing servicemembers and their dependents to join a waitlist
at new duty stations upon being notified of a PCS.
Joint-use facilities briefing
The committee notes its interest in having an effective
overall strategy for joint use facilities in the Indo-Pacific,
authorities for planning construction of potential dual-use
facilities, and an assessment on current facilities in States
that have entered into a Compact of Free Association with the
United States that have the potential to be a joint-use
facility.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment to
provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee, not
later than December 1, 2022, that shall include an assessment
of: (1) The overall strategy for joint-use facilities between
the Department of Defense and other Federal agencies in the
Indo-Pacific region, specifically in the Freely Associated
States; (2) The challenges and benefits of adding ports to the
joint use planning process of the Department; (3) The
limitations imposed by current authorities for joint-use
facilities that may hinder cost-sharing efforts; and (4) The
potential of all facilities of the U.S. Government in the
Freely Associated States to be a facility used by other Federal
agencies to foster cost-sharing benefits. The briefing shall
also identify any additional authorities needed to implement
military construction projects under the Pacific Deterrence
Initiative under section 1251 of the William M. (Mac)
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2021 (Public Law 116-283).
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln Lab Engineering
Prototyping Facility construction
The committee notes the importance of microelectronics in
great power competition. The committee further notes that the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Lincoln Lab is
essential to maintaining and furthering our qualitative edge in
microelectronics research and development and that the lab's
facilities are in worsening condition. The committee supported
the Air Force's fiscal year 2016 budget request that included
funding for the West Lab project and is pleased to see the
first phase of that project, the Compound Semi Conductor
Laboratory and Microelectronics Integration Facility, is
proceeding relatively on schedule. The committee is concerned
that the second phase of the West Lab project, the Engineering
Prototyping Facility (EPF), is not being similarly prioritized
by the Air Force. The EPF constitutes an urgently-needed
investment in national defense research and development
infrastructure and derivatively ensures the recruitment and
retention of the most talented science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics graduates in support of the
national defense mission. The start of the EPF construction
project in fiscal year 2023 is critical to ensuring that the
Department of Defense continues to receive innovative
technologies essential to maintaining superiority over
adversaries.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Department of the
Air Force to include the EPF facility in its military
construction request for fiscal year 2023. Additionally, the
committee further directs the Assistant Secretary of the Air
Force for Energy, Installations, and Environment to provide a
briefing to the Senate Armed Services Committee not later than
December 1, 2021, on the planned budgetary programming for the
completion of the EPF project and its associated construction
schedule.
Privatized lodging program
The committee notes that the Government Accountability
Office (GAO) published a report on June 8, 2021, titled
``Military Lodging: DOD Should Provide Congress with More
Information on Army's Privatization and Better Guidance to the
Military Services'' (GAO-21-214) that identified weaknesses in
the Privatized Army Lodging (PAL) Program and recommended
several improvements to PAL and to the lodging programs of the
other services.
Accordingly, consistent with the recommendations in GAO-21-
214, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to: (1)
Provide additional key information from the Army about the PAL
program in the Department's Military Housing Privatization
Initiative program reports to the Congress, beginning with the
report for fiscal year 2019, to include the status of
improvements to its facilities, time frames for completing
improvements, and any significant changes to the development
plan; (2) Require the Army to evaluate the methodology and
baseline it uses to calculate its cost avoidance estimate, to
include a comparison of alternative scenarios against a
different baseline in its calculations, and share the results
of this evaluation with the Congress; (3) Establish consistent
methodologies and clearly define the data that the services are
to report to the Secretary on their respective lodging
programs; and (4) Assess, by military service, the extent to
which servicemembers and civilian employees are inappropriately
using off-base lodging for official travel and why it is
occurring, develop a plan to address any issues identified, and
provide that plan to the Congress.
Finally, not later than March 1, 2022, the Secretary of
Defense shall provide a briefing to the Committee on Armed
Services of the Senate on the progress of the Secretary in
implementing the aforementioned recommendations.
Realizing B-21 depot land acquisition savings
The committee notes the importance of the B-21 Raider Long-
Range Strike Bomber program to maintain the safety of the
Homeland through power projection. The committee further notes
that as the B-21 comes online and becomes operational, an
extensive network of spares, repairables, touch labor, and
infrastructure must be ready when called upon.
The committee is concerned, however, that the Air Force has
yet to acquire certain lands that are optimal to begin
development of the B-21 depot campus at Tinker Air Force Base.
The committee also believes that the Air Force has not learned
from the mistakes of previous weapons system procurement, such
as the F-35, which had a number of issues in establishing a
successful depot level repair program.
The committee understands that at a cost of $30.0 million,
a single, contiguous campus has the potential to save an
estimated $285.0 million in B-21 program construction costs and
allow a much more efficient depot sustainment workflow process.
Furthermore, the committee understands the single campus
concept will reduce depot sustainment costs by an additional
$500.0 million over the life cycle of the B-21 program. The
committee notes that to support design and infrastructure work
for the B-21, land acquisition must occur not later than fiscal
year 2023 to support projected aircraft depot inductions.
Finally, the committee notes that in addition to the
operational impact of delaying the acquisition of the necessary
property, the Air Force will save $2.7 million per year alone
by acquiring the property vice leasing under an existing
construct.
Accordingly, the committee expects the Air Force to budget
for the acquisition of the aforementioned property not later
than fiscal year 2023 to avoid any program delays, which would
lead to degraded B-21 readiness and increased sustainment
costs. Additionally, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Air Force to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services
Committee not later than December 1, 2021, on the status of the
acquisition for the B-21 depot campus to include updated
schedule, cost, and estimated savings achieved by purchasing
the property vice leasing.
Report on improving Army Family Housing at Fort McNair, Washington,
D.C.
The committee notes that the existing Army-managed family
housing at Fort McNair consists of 23 buildings, offering 29
dwelling units. McKim, Mead, and White designed 21 of these
buildings as part of a full-campus redevelopment beginning in
1903, corresponding to the creation of the Army War College and
relocation of the Engineering School into a combined
educational campus. The committee is aware the historic housing
at Fort McNair is in failing condition and that without
rehabilitation or replacement risks continued deterioration to
the point of condemnation. The committee also understands the
necessity of preserving the Nation's heritage in concert with
the Army's efforts to provide safe and functional homes.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives a report on improving
Army Family Housing at Fort McNair, with a focus on the 15
General Officer Quarters (GOQs) located along the Washington
Channel. The report shall:
(1) Include an assessment of architectural,
engineering, and historic preservation design;
(2) Include expertise provided by a qualified
historic architect or historic preservation design
consultant;
(3) Assess the feasibility and provide cost analyses
and costs estimates for the following alternatives:
(a) rehabilitation of the housing following
the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and
Guidelines for the Treatment of Historic
Properties to operate and maintain for at least
50 years;
(b) partial demolition, i.e., retention of
the facade and building envelope only, and
redesign and renovation of all interior spaces
and mechanical systems to modern standards;
(c) full demolition and replacement of the
GOQs to include demolition and debris disposal
of the current housing, evaluation of current
and alternate siting on Fort McNair, and cost
estimates for new housing construction to
current GOQ standards;
(d) renovation and adaptive reuse of the
housing for other than GOQ housing purposes of
the Army or other tenant organizations;
(e) no action other than continued annual
maintenance and repair at currently programmed
funding levels; and
(f) any other additional course(s) of action
the Army deems feasible;
(4) Incorporate the use of imitative substitute
building materials as an alternative to higher cost
historic building materials or in-kind building
materials in the alternatives considered, as
appropriate; and
(5) Evaluate the costs and impacts of all alternative
courses of action on the Fort McNair Historic District,
Army War College National Historic Landmark, and
surrounding historic properties, to include design and
rendering services and viewshed analysis.
The report shall be submitted not later than March 1, 2022,
and be used as a guide for decision-making regarding future
treatment of this housing. The Army may, at its discretion,
expand this analysis to include the historic family housing at
Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall, Virginia, and any other
locations the Army deems appropriate.
Review of restricted use easements
The committee continues to support the Department of
Defense's balancing of military installation encroachment
issues, concerns, and proposed resolutions. However, the
committee is concerned that restricted use easements (RUEs)
associated with Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Miramar may no
longer be needed to support its readiness mission and may
conflict with the committee and Department's goal of enhancing
cooperation between military installations and their supporting
communities regarding commercial housing developments.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to review all RUEs at MCAS Miramar for the purpose of
determining their current relevancy for mission readiness
support and whether they may be relinquished at fair market
value to allow for development of new housing projects that are
contained within approved and adopted community plans. These
plans must have taken into consideration the training, safety,
and mission requirements associated with the adjacent military
installation, as well as quality-of-life considerations such as
close proximity to the installation and costs associated with
military participation, such as Basic Allowance for Housing
allowances. The Secretary shall provide a briefing on the
review to the Senate Armed Services Committee not later than
March 1, 2022.
Sustainable building materials
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
is not adequately modernizing its acquisition approach for
military construction projects that could lead to improved
schedule, decreased costs, sustainability, and increased
availability of materials. The committee believes that
sustainable materials could be a viable alternative to certain
traditional materials used in construction when technically
feasible.
The committee notes that in the Conference Report (H. Rept.
116-442) accompanying the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, the Secretary
of Defense was required to submit a report to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
not later than June 1, 2021. The committee notes that the
report was to include, at a minimum, a description of potential
uses for innovative wood technologies, such as mass timber and
cellulose nanomaterials in new military construction; the
sustainment and renovation of existing facilities; and an
analysis of any barriers to incorporating these innovative wood
product technologies into these areas.
The committee is discouraged that the Department has not
made this report a priority as it could lead to cost-savings
and improved schedules, especially in a time when lumber
availability is scarce with historic high prices.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Department to
prioritize this report and looks forward to receiving it as
soon as possible. Additionally, the committee believes that the
Department should strongly consider sustainable materials, like
cross-laminated timber, when establishing evaluation criteria
for military construction project contracts when technically
feasible.
Unspecified Minor Military Construction
The committee recognizes the importance of military
construction in support of the 2018 National Defense Strategy.
The committee notes that while major military construction
projects support a range of assets from depots to next-
generation platforms, unspecified minor military construction
(UMMC) also plays a vital part to both operational, support,
and research facilities, yet billions of dollars in unfunded
requirements still exist.
The committee notes that one such example of these UMMC
projects exists at the Engineer Research and Development Center
(ERDC). The committee understands projects such as the proposed
Military Pavement Repair and Maintenance Research Facility
would improve the ability to conduct research into long-term
pavement sustainability. Additionally, the committee notes that
the proposed Simulator Building will allow ERDC to conduct
classified research on ship-to-shore operations in support of
the Army and Army Service Component Commands' missions
worldwide.
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Department of
Defense and military services to ensure proper resource
allocations are made for UMMC accounts.
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND
OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS
Subtitle A--National Security Programs and Authorizations
National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriation of funds for the activities of the National
Nuclear Security Administration.
Defense environmental cleanup (sec. 3102)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriation of funds for the Department of Energy's
defense environmental cleanup activities.
Other defense activities (sec. 3103)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriation of funds for the Department of Energy's other
defense activities.
Nuclear energy (sec. 3104)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriation of funds for the Department of Energy's
nuclear energy activities.
Subtitle B--Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Matters
Portfolio management framework for National Nuclear Security
Administration (sec. 3111)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), within one
year of the enactment of this Act, to (1) Develop and implement
an enterprise-wide portfolio management framework that details
NNSA's approach and incorporates the leading practices
identified by GAO in GAO-21-398 and (2) Complete a single,
integrated assessment that is comprehensive and complete, and
includes all of the capabilities needed to execute the weapons
activities portfolio. The provision would direct NNSA to
provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees, not
later than June 1, 2022, on its progress in developing a
weapons activities portfolio management framework and its plans
for implementing GAO's recommendations.
The Government Accountability Office's (GAO) report
published on June 9, 2021, titled ``Nuclear Security
Enterprise: NNSA Should Use Portfolio Management Leading
Practices to Support Modernization Efforts'' (GAO-21-398),
found that the NNSA is in the early stages of initiating its
portfolio management processes and has partially implemented
leading practices. GAO recommended that NNSA establish an
enterprise-wide portfolio management framework that defines the
portfolio of weapons stockpile and infrastructure maintenance
and modernization programs and its governance roles, and
includes portfolio-level selection criteria, prioritization
criteria, and performance metrics. Further, GAO found that NNSA
has not developed a comprehensive or complete capability
assessment to support its strategic management of its weapons
activities portfolio of work, and recommended that NNSA work
across its offices to do so. In comments on the draft report,
NNSA officials said they believe they have implemented both of
GAO's recommendations based on the Agency's existing processes.
The committee is concerned that NNSA officials believe they
have already implemented GAO's recommendations, despite NNSA
only partially implementing portfolio management leading
practices and not comprehensively or completely assessing its
capabilities. The committee believes it prudent for NNSA to
take additional action and update the committee on the status
and direction of its efforts.
Reports on risks to and gaps in industrial base for nuclear weapons
components, subsystems, and materials (sec. 3112)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify
section 3113 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-
283) to include a reporting requirement, coincident with the
existing briefing requirement, regarding industrial base risk
monitoring carried out by the National Nuclear Security
Administration.
Sense of Senate on oversight role of Congress in conduct of nuclear
weapons testing (sec. 3113)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of the Senate that the Congress should have an oversight
role on nuclear weapons testing. The committee recognizes the
continued certification of the nuclear stockpile by the
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and assessment
of the Department of Defense that no identified conditions
require the resumption of underground nuclear testing.
Further, the committee notes that much of the legacy
technology associated with testing activity has become obsolete
and the development of new methods and modern technologies,
such as instrumentation for state of the art high speed data
acquisition and capabilities to detect differing forms of
energies, would likely be required should a need to
reconstitute this capability arise, particularly in relation to
a complex, well-diagnosed test. Absent such an effort, the
committee is concerned that confidence in the current posture
will deteriorate.
Accordingly the committee directs the Administrator of the
NNSA to update the congressional defense committees, not later
than September 30, 2022, on the status of section 4207 of the
Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2527) and, in particular,
how the current work with respect to U1a Complex Enhancements
Project and the Enhanced Capabilities for Subcritical
Experiments assists this program.
Subtitle C--Defense Environmental Cleanup Matters
Part I--Environmental Management Liability Reduction and Technology
Development
Environmental management liability reduction and technology development
(secs. 3121-3125)
The committee recommends a series of provisions that would
create a series of competitively selected technology
demonstration programs and a university grant program to
underpin the advanced technology required to support the
Department of Energy's long-term effort to clean up former Cold
War nuclear weapons sites and its commitment to the communities
around these sites. In fiscal year 2020, the Department's
environmental liability for this cleanup was estimated at
$512.0 billion--related primarily to retrieving, treating, and
disposing of nuclear and hazardous waste. This is the largest
share of environmental liability across the entire Federal
Government. The Government Accountability Office added this
area to its High-Risk List in 2017, indicating that it is at
high risk for fraud, waste, and abuse. The provision could
accordingly lead to a reduction in the overall cleanup cost.
Part II--Other Matters
Comprehensive strategy for treating, storing, and disposing of defense
nuclear waste resulting from stockpile maintenance and
modernization activities (sec. 3131)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to develop a
comprehensive strategy that includes: (1) The type and quantity
of defense nuclear waste it will generate as a result of
stockpile maintenance and modernization activities; (2) How it
plans to coordinate with the Department of Energy's Office of
Environmental Management to treat, store, and dispose of the
waste; and (3) Potential disposal facilities that could accept
these waste streams. The estimate should incorporate near,
medium, and long term projections with a budgetary estimate
over the next 5 fiscal years. The provision would further
require an update to the strategy be submitted with the budget
request for fiscal year 2027.
The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to assess NNSA's strategy and report to the
congressional defense committees 180 days after the strategy is
completed. The committee further directs the Comptroller
General to perform a similar assessment for the second strategy
submitted with the fiscal year 2027 budget submission.
The committee notes that as the United States continues to
maintain and modernize its nuclear weapons stockpile, waste
will continue to be generated and must be treated, stored, and
disposed of. In particular, activities to fabricate new
plutonium pits, the cores of nuclear weapons, are expected to
generate a considerable volume of transuranic waste. It is not
clear whether there are sufficient facilities to address the
waste generated by these activities or whether such facilities
are included in current plans and budgets.
Subtitle D--Budget and Financial Management Matters
Improvements to cost estimates informing analyses of alternatives (sec.
3141)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Administrator for Nuclear Security, with notification to
the congressional defense committees, to seek Project
Engineering and Design (PED) funds prior to Critical Decision 1
to begin conceptual design work during the analysis of
alternatives (AoA) process and develop more robust cost
estimates under conditions outlined in the provision in order
to improve the fidelity of cost estimates utilized in an AoA
for large projects.
Additionally, the provision directs the Administrator to
ensure that any cost estimate used in an AoA for a large
project is designed to fully satisfy the requirements outlined
in the mission needs statement approved at Critical Decision 0
in the acquisition process, as set forth in Department of
Energy Order 413.3B (or a successor order).
Modification of requirements for certain construction projects (sec.
3142)
The committee recommends a provision that would increase
the threshold for a minor construction project, as used under
chapter 42 of title 50, United States Code, from $20.0 million
to $25.0 million to account for inflation.
Modification to terminology for reports of financial balances for
atomic energy defense activities (sec. 3143)
The committee recommends a provision that would further
clarify terminology developed in section 3151 of the William M.
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283) to reflect using the term
``encumbered'' instead of ``committed'' in order to refer to
funds that have been obligated by the Department of Energy
(DOE) to a contract and have been reserved by the contractor
for a specific purpose, such as a subcontract. The committee
notes that other agencies in the executive branch generally use
the term ``committed'' to refer to an administrative
reservation of allotted funds prior to obligation. The
committee believes that using a distinct term helps clarify who
is acting in any given situation being described in DOE's
reports, since commitment and obligation are only done by the
Federal Government, whereas encumbrance is only done by a
contractor.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Extension of authority for appointment of certain scientific,
engineering, and technical personnel (sec. 3151)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
section 4601(c)(1) of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C.
2701(c)(1)) from September 30, 2021 to September 30, 2026 in
order to hire up to 200 scientific, engineering, and technical
personnel under exempt status.
Extension of enhanced procurement authority to manage supply chain risk
(sec. 3152)
The committee recommends a provision that extends the
authority to limit in whole or in part procurement disclosure
information found in section 2786 of title 50, United States
Code, from June 30, 2023 to December 31, 2028, to limit the
risk to the nuclear weapons supply chain.
Extension of authority for acceptance of contributions for acceleration
of removal or security of fissile materials, radiological
materials, and related equipment at vulnerable sites worldwide
(sec. 3153)
The committee recommends a provision that extends the
authority found in section 3132 of the Ronald W. Reagan
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public
Law 108-375) and incorporated into the Atomic Energy Defense
Act (50 U.S.C. 2565 et seq.) to accept foreign contributions to
help secure fissile material worldwide from December 31, 2023
to December 31, 2028.
Updates to Infrastructure Modernization Initiative (sec. 3154)
The committee remains concerned about the state of the
physical infrastructure within the nuclear security enterprise
of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA).
According to NNSA's Stockpile Stewardship and Management Plan
for Fiscal Year 2021, ``more than a third of NNSA's total
infrastructure assets (as a percentage of replacement plant
value) are in poor or very poor condition and are insufficient
to meet mission needs.'' The committee notes that section 3111
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018
(Public Law 115-91) created the Infrastructure Modernization
Initiative (IMI) with the goal of reducing the backlog of
deferred maintenance and repair needs by not less than 30
percent by 2025. At the time, the estimated backlog of deferred
maintenance and repair needs of the nuclear security enterprise
was approximately $3.7 billion. However, the President's budget
request for fiscal year 2022 estimates that out of a total
Replacement Plant Value of $116.0 billion, the NNSA has a $9.4
billion backlog of repair needs and a $5.8 billion backlog of
deferred maintenance. The committee understands recent changes
to infrastructure management practices have significantly
impacted estimates of both deferred maintenance and repair
needs and that the increasing estimates are not directly
reflective of a decline in the infrastructure's physical
condition. Nevertheless, in order to improve oversight of the
IMI, the committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Administrator of the NNSA to provide an updated IMI plan and
make other improvements to the original statute.
Acquisition of high-performance computing capabilities by National
Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3155)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of the Senate that the National Nuclear Security
Administration's (NNSA) Advanced Simulation and Computing
program is an essential element of the Stockpile Stewardship
Program, and developing the next generation of exascale high-
performance computers to conduct performance assessments of
nuclear weapons systems and next-generation weapons design is
in the national security interest of the United States. The
provision would require the Administrator for Nuclear Security,
in consultation with the Secretary of Energy, to submit a
roadmap outlining the Administration's plans for high-
performance computing acquisitions over the next 10 years. The
roadmap would be due 2 years after the date of the enactment of
this Act to allow adequate consultation with an ongoing review
by the National Academies of Sciences on high-performance
computing at the NNSA. The provision would require the National
Nuclear Security Administrator to enter into an arrangement
with a federally funded research and development center (FFRDC)
or other organization to independently assess the program's
next high-performance computing acquisition, with a report
assessing the acquisition due 90 days after entering into an
arrangement with the FFRDC.
Limitation on use of funds for naval nuclear fuel systems based on low-
enriched uranium (sec. 3156)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the obligation or expenditure of any fiscal year 2022 funds at
the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to conduct
research and development of an advanced naval nuclear fuel
system based on low-enriched uranium unless the Secretary of
Defense, the Secretary of Energy, and the Secretary of the Navy
communicate certain determinations to the congressional defense
committees. The provision would also require the Administrator
of the NNSA to submit to the congressional defense committees,
not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, a report outlining activities undertaken using fiscal year
2021 funds for this purpose, including progress made toward
either technological or nonproliferation goals.
The committee notes that the Secretary of Energy and the
Secretary of the Navy stated in a letter to the congressional
defense committees dated March 25, 2018, that such a research
and development effort would cost about $1.0 billion over a 10-
to-15-year period, ``with success not assured.'' It would also
result in a reactor design that would be ``less capable, more
expensive, and unlikely to support current life-of-ship
submarine reactors,'' which would reduce operational
availability and increase force structure requirements.
Budget Items
National Nuclear Security Administration Production Modernization--
depleted uranium modernization
The budget request included $138.2 million for National
Nuclear Security Administration Production Modernization
depleted uranium modernization, an increase of $27.3 million
from the prior year to re-start the production line. The
depleted uranium process is crucial to a responsive
infrastructure but relies on metallurgical processing that is
inefficient and outdated. The committee recommends an increase
of $5.0 million, for a total of $143.2 million, in order to
help acquire cold hearth furnace technology that will increase
production efficiency.
National Nuclear Security Administration Stockpile Research, Technology
and Engineering
The budget request included $2.7 billion for the National
Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA) stockpile research,
technology and engineering program.
Stockpile research, technology and engineering is a
critical technology insertion for the NNSA's weapons program
that modernizes underlying capabilities for significant finding
investigations and helps retain and draw a new generation of
workforce. While it is critical that the NNSA meet Department
of Defense production requirements, the NNSA cannot and must
not reduce investments that underpin the future of the weapons
program.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase in the
stockpile research, technology and engineering program of
$165.8 million, for a total of $2.8 billion as follows: a $19.0
million increase for primary assessment technologies to
continue the fundamental understanding of implosion and yield;
a $28.0 million increase for dynamic material properties to
continue understanding critical constitutive properties of
materials under shock loading; a $5.6 million increase for
advanced diagnostics to continue to develop state of the art
diagnostics for stockpile stewardship activities; a $12.1
million increase for secondary assessment technologies to
continue understanding the nature of radiation cross sections,
material compatibility, and fusion phenomena; a $15.3 million
increase for hydrodynamic and subcritical experiment execution
support for subcritical experiments; a $500,000 increase for
aging and lifetimes to continue understanding material aging; a
$500,000 increase for advanced certification and qualification
to continue capabilities to certify the stockpile; a $70.0
million increase for inertial confinement fusion to continue
operations, target fabrication, and advanced research at the
three primary facilities--the Laboratory for Laser Energetics
(LLE) at the University of Rochester, the Z machine at Sandia
National Laboratories, and the National Ignition Facility at
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. In particular, the LLE
draws new graduate students into the weapons programs, which
grow future leaders in the NNSA and its laboratories. The
surety technologies program is increased by $1.9 million to
ensure a safe stockpile. The weapon technology development
program is increased by $6.6 million for the development of
agile manufacturing techniques. Finally and most importantly,
the committee recommends an increase of $6.3 million for
academic programs to attract new scientific talent into the
NNSA and its contractor workforce. The committee notes that
while the Advanced Simulation and Computing Program increased
by $15.0 million, this does not make up for cuts in prior years
at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLNL); the NNSA should re-
prioritize within the overall amount with the increase to avoid
this shortfall at LLNL.
National Nuclear Security Administration Infrastructure and Operations
The budget request included $3.6 billion for National
Nuclear Security Administration infrastructure and operations,
a decrease of $501.1 million. While much of the decrease is
associated with completion or wind down of line item
construction projects ($423.0 million), a $78.1 million
decrease is proposed to the operations of facilities. The
committee recommends an increase of $82.1 million to operations
of facilities as follows: $66.0 million for infrastructure and
safety, $6.1 million for capabilities based investments, and
$10.0 million to continue planning for programmatic
construction.
National Nuclear Security Administration Secure Transportation Asset
The budget request included $336.7 million for National
Nuclear Security Administration's Secure Transportation Asset.
The committee recommends an increase of $18.6 million as
follows: a $12.0 million increase for operations and equipment
for the increased number of asset movements and to accelerate
the development of new transportation equipment, such as the
Mighty Guardian Trailers and a $6.6 million increase for
program direction to help coordinate and oversee these special
logistics, as well as to increase training and recruiting of
Federal agents.
National Nuclear Security Administration Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation
The budget request included $2.3 billion for National
Nuclear Security Administration Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation activities. The committee recommends an
overall increase of $57.0 million as follows: a $10.0 million
increase to the Laboratory and Partnership Support program to
continue working with U.S. domestic industry to reduce U.S.
reliance on isotopes produced by highly enriched uranium; a
$27.0 million increase to the Domestic Radiological Security
program in order to continue the collection of radiological
sources; a $10.0 million increase to the Nuclear Smuggling and
Detection Program to continue efforts globally to work with
host nations to detect and apprehend the smuggling of nuclear
materials; and a $10.0 million increase to the Emergency
Operations program to continue to upgrade emergency operations
equipment.
Department of Energy Environmental Management--Hanford River Corridor
and other cleanup operations
The budget request included $196.0 million for Department
of Energy Environmental Management Hanford River Corridor
cleanup, a decrease of $36.5 million from the prior year. The
committee recommends an increase of $37.0 million to restore
the proposed decrease.
Department of Energy Environmental Management--Hanford Office of River
Protection Tank Farm Activities
The budget request included $817.6 million for continued
stabilization of the tank farm at the Department of Energy
Environmental Management Hanford reservation to increase single
shell tank retrieval operations and replacement of slurry lines
to support the 242-A evaporator. Since these operations are
critical to meeting State of Washington Consent Decree
Milestones and maintaining overall safety of operations, the
committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million.
Department of Energy Environmental Management National Nuclear Security
Administration Sites and Nevada Offsite: Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory excess facility decontamination and
decommissioning
The budget request included $35.0 million for continued
cleanup by the Department of Energy Environmental Management of
excess facilities at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory,
the same as the prior year.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million to
help accelerate this effort.
Department of Energy Environmental Management: Oak Ridge Nuclear
Facility Decontamination and Decommissioning
The budget request included $274.9 million for the
Department of Energy Environmental Management to cleanup
contamination of facilities, dating back to the Manhattan
Project, at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the Y-12
plant. The committee recommends an increase of $50.0 million to
help accelerate the cleanup of high risk contaminated
facilities at the Y-12 plant (project OR-0041).
Department of Energy Environmental Management--Savannah River Nuclear
Materials Stabilization and Disposition
The budget request included $312.7 million for Department
of Energy Environmental Management Savannah River Nuclear
Materials Stabilization and Disposition, a decrease of $37.0
million from the prior year. This program provides maintenance
and operations for H-canyon, the Nation's only remaining large
scale chemical reprocessing facility. The committee recommends
an increase of $24.3 million to help restore the proposed
decrease and maintain operations at H-canyon.
Department of Energy Environmental Management--Savannah River Community
and Regulatory Support
The budget request included $5.8 million for the Department
of Energy Environmental Management Savannah River Community and
Regulatory Support, a decrease of $5.7 million from the prior
year. The committee recommends an increase of $5.7 million to
restore the proposed decrease for a final value of $11.5
million.
Department of Energy Environmental Management--Uranium Enrichment
Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund
The budget request included $6.8 billion for the Department
of Energy's Office of Environmental Management, of which $415.7
million was requested to transfer to the Uranium
Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund, which was authorized
in section 1101 the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-
486) but expired in 2007. Similar to the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239),
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014
(Public Law 113-66), the Carl Levin and Howard P. `Buck' McKeon
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public
Law 113-291), and the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92), the administration should
be proposing to directly contribute to this fund rather than
using the Office of Environmental Management's budget as a
contribution source. Accordingly, the committee recommends a
decrease of $415.7 million for the contribution of the Office
of Environmental Management to the Fund.
Department of Energy Legacy Management--Formerly Utilized Sites
Remedial Action Program
The budget request included $428.7 million for the
Department of Energy's Office of Legacy Management, of which
$250.0 million was requested to support cleanup activities that
would normally be performed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) at Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program
(FUSRAP) sites. Similar to past years, the committee does not
see any reason to introduce risk into cleanup activities at
FUSRAP sites by transitioning the administration of the program
to a different organization when USACE has successfully
administered the program since 1997. Accordingly, the committee
recommends a decrease of $250.0 million, for a total of $178.7
million, for the Office of Legacy Management.
Items of Special Interest
Acquisition planning and impacts of choice of contract type on
performance
The committee notes the Department of Energy (DOE)--
including its National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)--
obligates about 80 percent of its annual appropriations on
contracts for various purposes. High-quality planning is
critical for successful acquisitions. The committee directs the
Comptroller General of the United States to review the DOE's
and the NNSA's acquisition planning processes. The review shall
include: (1) The DOE's and the NNSA's acquisition planning
requirements and how they differ among types of acquisitions;
(2) How offices have tailored these requirements; (3) Examples
of how the DOE and the NNSA have performed market research for
different types of acquisitions; (4) Approaches to performing
independent Government estimates and the outcomes of these
estimates; (5) How offices determine the contract type and
incentives for the contract; (6) The extent to which offices
have identified benefits and drawbacks or lessons learned from
using certain contract types or incentives, including effects
on contractor performance; and (7) The challenges that offices
have encountered in developing or implementing acquisition
plans. The Comptroller General shall provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees on their plan to conduct such
a review not later than June 30, 2022.
Applying knowledge-based acquisitions framework to weapons
modernization programs
Over the next decade, the Department of Defense (DOD) and
the Department of Energy (DOE), through its National Nuclear
Security Administration (NNSA), plan to spend billions of
dollars modernizing the Nation's nuclear weapons, including
delivery platforms, warheads, and bombs. The DOD acquires new
delivery platforms through a management process known as the
Defense Acquisition System, while NNSA refurbishes nuclear
warheads and bombs through a joint management process with the
DOD known as the Phase 6.X process. Both management processes
generally require their acquisition programs to proceed through
phases of development that include a series of milestone
reviews and other key decision points that may authorize entry
into a new phase of acquisition. The NNSA has issued a
directive for implementing the Phase 6.X process that includes
additional requirements and recommendations for each phase.
Moreover, in its fiscal year 2021 budget request, the NNSA
stated that it plans to manage a new weapon modernization
program, the W93 program, using the ``joint NNSA-DOD phase 1-7
weapons acquisition process that is very similar to the Phase
6.X process.''
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has issued a
series of reports over the past few decades examining how the
DOD's practices related to weapons acquisitions--such as its
use of systems engineering, requirements setting, and design
knowledge--compare to the best practices the GAO identified at
leading commercial firms. In particular, the GAO has
established a body of work showing that positive acquisition
outcomes require the use of a knowledge-based approach to
product development that demonstrates high levels of knowledge
attained before significant commitments are made. This work led
to multiple GAO recommendations that the DOD has generally or
partially agreed with. While DOD programs continue to struggle
in fully implementing knowledge-based acquisition practices,
the GAO has found that the major DOD acquisition programs that
more closely followed a knowledge-based approach had
significantly lower cost and schedule growth than those that
did not.
As the NNSA begins to exercise the Phase 1-7 process for
acquiring a nuclear weapon, it is incorporating modern program
and project management requirements that have been incorporated
into the Phase 6.X process over time. However, it is not clear
the extent to which the Phase 1-7 process, which the NNSA is
using to signal a new system acquisition rather than the
modernization or refurbishment of an existing system, uses a
knowledge-based approach.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to review NNSA's acquisition process for
warhead modernization and system acquisition to address: (1)
How the NNSA's process for managing its warhead life extension
and acquisition programs compares with DOD's process for
managing weapon system acquisitions; (2) To what extent does
NNSA apply a knowledge-based approach to its life extension
programs under the Phase 6.X process and its associated
directive; and (3) To what extent does NNSA plan to apply a
knowledge-based approach in its Phase 1-7 process that it plans
to use to manage the W93 and other future weapon programs. The
committee directs the Comptroller General to provide a briefing
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House
of Representatives on the status of the review not later than
April 30, 2022, with a report to follow on a date mutually
agreed upon by the committees and the Comptroller General.
Assessment of Department of Energy's Office of Environmental Management
cleanup at Los Alamos National Laboratory
The Department of Energy's Office of Environmental
Management (EM) conducts legacy cleanup at Los Alamos National
Laboratory (LANL) of hazardous chemical and radioactive
materials contamination as a result of the lab's operations
since its founding in 1943. The cleanup spans a wide range of
activities, including surface and groundwater monitoring and
remediation, removing contaminated soil, and decontaminating
and decommissioning surplus buildings. Cleanup of contaminated
sites is conducted under a 2016 Compliance Order on Consent
with the New Mexico Environment Department. Over 2,100
contaminated sites at LANL were originally identified for
action and over half of them have been closed, ranging from
small spill sites to large landfills encompassing several
acres.
Given the large number of cleanup operations underway, the
committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States
to assess the status of cleanup at LANL, including the planned
scope of EM activities at LANL and EM's progress to date; the
efficiency of EM's efforts to plan and execute cleanup
activities at LANL; and challenges to the completion of the
cleanup at LANL. The study shall coordinate, to the extent
possible, ongoing operations for waste from current pit
production and its impact, if any, on cleanup operations.
The Comptroller General shall brief the congressional
defense committees on the status of its review by May 1, 2022,
with a report to accompany the briefing or follow at a time
agreed upon with the committees.
Briefing on options for accelerating the reestablishment of domestic
uranium enrichment capabilities
The committee recognizes that a domestic uranium enrichment
capability is important for U.S. national security interests.
To reestablish this capability, the committee supports ongoing
efforts by the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)
to develop and implement long-term plans for continued
research, development, and demonstration of enrichment
technologies to support deployment decisions, including
activities to: (1) Increase the Technology Readiness Level of
enrichment technologies to facilitate deployment; (2) Improve
the economics and reliability of these technologies; and (3)
Maintain Federal Government expertise in this area.
As such, the committee directs the Administrator for
Nuclear Security of the NNSA to provide a briefing to the
congressional defense committees, not later than May 30, 2022,
on options for, and projected associated costs of, accelerating
the reestablishment of a domestic uranium enrichment capability
for the United States.
Continued oversight of lithium
The National Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA)
planned Lithium Production Facility (LPF) at its Y-12 National
Security Site is expected to begin construction in 2025 and
start full operations between 2030 and 2033. To support current
stockpile needs until the LPF is fully operational, the NNSA is
taking a number of steps over the next decade to sustain
lithium operations. The committee directs the Comptroller
General of the United States, in consultation with the
congressional defense committees, to periodically review the
LPF and related lithium sustainment activities. These reviews
shall take into consideration critical decisions for the LPF as
well as the requirements, cost, schedule, and technology
readiness levels of the project and the sustainment program.
Continuing Comptroller General evaluation of the Hanford Waste
Treatment Plant
The committee notes that the Department of Energy's Office
of Environmental Management (EM) continues to appear on the
Government Accountability Office's High Risk List report. EM's
largest project resides at the Hanford site in Washington
State. This site, whose mission is nuclear waste cleanup and
environmental restoration, has faced numerous technical
challenges, cost overruns, and schedule delays.
Because of the extremely challenging, multi-decade long
mission at Hanford, the committee directs the Comptroller
General of the United States to continue its ongoing evaluation
of environmental cleanup efforts at the Hanford Site, including
the Waste Treatment Plant, in the areas of cost and schedule
performance; technology readiness levels; contractor assurance;
and project management, as well as the start of direct-feed
low-activity waste treatment and Hanford's long-term schedule
and budget needs.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to continue
the periodic briefings to the congressional defense committees
on significant findings and trends whose date and frequency are
to be mutually agreed upon by the Comptroller General and the
congressional defense committees, with an initial briefing
required not later than March 31, 2022.
Continuing Comptroller General oversight of Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
The committee notes that recovery from the 2014 accidents
at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) necessitates
additional oversight, including biannual briefings to the
congressional defense committees on actions taken towards
bringing WIPP toward full operational status. This includes key
milestones, the status of any capital projects under Department
of Energy Order 413.3B, as well as obligations and
expenditures.
The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to continue periodic briefings to the congressional
defense committees on significant findings and trends, whose
date and frequency are to be mutually agreed upon by the
Comptroller General and the congressional defense committees,
with an initial briefing required not later than March 31,
2022.
Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management's End State
Contracting
The committee notes that in 2020, the Department of
Energy's (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) began
implementing a new contracting initiative called End State
Contracting. According to EM, End State Contracting will
provide EM with the flexibility to task contractors using a
risk-based approach to define discrete scopes of work that will
move sites toward completion and reduce DOE's environmental
liability. Previous Government Accountability Office (GAO)
reviews have revealed problems with EM's management of
contracts and major projects, which have been on GAO's High
Risk List since 1990. Over the last three decades, GAO has
found many problems with DOE's management of its major capital
asset projects--those with a total project cost over $750
million--including uncontrolled changes to scope, exceeding
budgets and schedules, and failing to meet the original
mission.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess EM's implementation of End State
Contracting and the extent to which EM has the capacity needed
for this model to be successful.
The Comptroller General shall brief the congressional
defense committees on the status of its review by May 1, 2022,
with a report to accompany the briefing or follow at a time
agreed upon with the committees.
Direct-feed high-level waste at the Hanford Site
The Department of Energy's Office of Environmental
Management (EM) has been building the Waste Treatment and
Immobilization Plant, which consists of multiple facilities,
including a key pretreatment facility, to treat a large portion
of the nuclear waste at the Hanford Site in Washington State.
The pretreatment facility was originally intended to separate
waste streams to a low activity portion and a high level
portion. In late 2012, work on the pretreatment facility
stopped until technical challenges could be resolved and, as of
2021, EM has not resumed construction. In 2018, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers reported that at current annual funding
levels, completing the pretreatment facility on time would not
be possible based on escalating costs. EM has been pursuing
alternatives for low-activity waste pretreatment capabilities
originally planned for the pretreatment facility; this approach
is known as direct-feed low-activity waste. In April 2019, EM
began an analysis of alternatives for treating high-level waste
(HLW), to include a direct-feed option, which EM expects to be
completed in 2021.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to assess EM's approach to analyzing options
for direct-feed high-level waste, including the defined mission
need, projected costs and schedule for direct-feed HLW, the
impact of each alternative on the overall Hanford cleanup cost
and schedule, the technology readiness of direct-feed HLW
technology, and challenges to constructing and operating
direct-feed HLW equipment or facilities.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to report its
findings to the congressional defense committees not later than
March 31, 2022, with periodic updates as agreed upon by the
Comptroller General and the congressional defense committees.
Greater-Than-Class C waste disposal
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering a
rulemaking to allow for near-surface disposal of Greater-Than-
Class C (GTCC) and GTCC-like waste at commercial waste
repositories. The National Nuclear Security Administration has
been storing GTCC waste awaiting a disposal pathway for it.
Under current rules such waste is not generally acceptable for
disposal in a near-surface repository because of the
concentrations of certain radionuclides present in this waste.
Under these rules, such waste would therefore generally need to
be disposed of in a geologic repository, and the only geologic
repository available in the United States is the Waste
Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). However, that site is limited to
defense waste.
Based on current NRC rules and the possibility of future
rulemaking authorizing near-surface disposal as an option, the
committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States
to assess: (1) The extent to which the Department of Energy's
Office of Environmental Management and the National Nuclear
Security Administration have evaluated the costs and benefits
of disposing of GTCC and GTCC-like waste at a commercial
repository; (2) How GTCC and GTCC-like waste would be
transported to a commercial repository; and (3) How the
disposal of GTCC and GTCC-like waste at a commercial facility
would affect the Federal Government's responsibilities for the
site after its closure.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to brief the
congressional defense committees on the status of its review by
May 1, 2022, with a report to accompany the briefing or follow
at a date agreed upon by the Comptroller General and the
congressional defense committees.
Kansas City National Security Campus planning
Modernization of the Nation's nuclear stockpile depends on
timely procurement and production of vital nonnuclear parts and
components. The Kansas City National Security Campus (KCNSC)
procures or produces most of these parts under National Nuclear
Security Administration (NNSA) oversight, with about 65 percent
of current components purchased from commercial sources. In
fiscal year 2012, the site completed construction of a modern
production facility. The new facility was expected to
accommodate rising future workload demands, based on the
forecasts that were current in 2012.
As the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported in
an April 12, 2019, report, titled ``Modernizing the Nuclear
Security Enterprise: NNSA is Taking Action to Manage Increased
Workload at Kansas City National Security Campus'' (GAO 19
126), workload demands have increased substantially since 2012.
This has resulted in the KCNSC planning to hire thousands of
new workers, lease additional office and production space in
the highly competitive Kansas City job market, replace or
recapitalize production equipment, and maintain a reliable base
of commercial suppliers to meet increased demand. This latter
issue of maintaining the supplier base also includes quality
assurance testing, which is of particular concern to the
committee in light of the recent challenges presented by
problems with a commercially-sourced capacitor.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to reevaluate the progress of the NNSA and
the KCNSC towards addressing identified risks in office space,
production space, employee hiring, production equipment
recapitalization, and commercial sourcing and quality assurance
practices. The committee directs the Comptroller General of the
United States to provide a briefing on this evaluation not
later than March 31, 2022, with a final report to be provided
on a date mutually agreed upon by the committees and the
Comptroller General.
Limitations to Nuclear Weapons Availability to the Department of
Defense
The committee is aware the Department of Defense (DOD) and
the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) are in
midst of an extensive nuclear modernization program involving
delivery platforms, warheads, and bombs. As weapons are
refurbished, the national laboratories update a major assembly
release (MAR) document when they determine that a nuclear
weapon meets specifications for release to the military
service. Among other things, the MAR contains a list of the
weapon's limitations, which are areas where the weapon may not
meet certain military requirements throughout its operational
environment, known as the Stockpile-to-Target Sequence.
Limitations may also specify additional conditions for storing,
maintaining, or operating the weapon. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) work undertaken a decade ago showed that there
were over 50 nuclear weapons limitations. DOD officials at the
time expressed concern over the impact that certain weapon
limitations had on weapon operation, maintenance, and war
planning but believed the stockpile was flexible enough to
mitigate these concerns. However, they told GAO that there may
be less flexibility in the future as the stockpile continues to
age and decrease in size. Further, as weapons are modernized,
limitations may change or may have been addressed,
necessitating updates to other weapons guidance and
documentation.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General
of the United States to update existing work on weapons
limitations to review: (1) Current limitations and the extent
to which completed, ongoing, and planned refurbishments, as
well as new warhead designs, may mitigate the limitations; (2)
Constraints imposed on the DOD's ability to store, maintain, or
operate the weapons; and (3) Other issues as the Comptroller
General may deem appropriate with respect to understanding the
impact of limitations on stockpile planning and management. The
committee directs the Comptroller General to provide the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives a briefing on these matters not later than
March 31, 2022.
Long term support for the Nevada National Security Site
Since its inception, the Nevada National Security Site
(NNSS) has relied on its large and remote area to conduct
missions for the nuclear weapons and nonproliferation programs,
as well as other elements of the national security community.
The mission approach, however, has led to difficulties in
enduring core institutional funding for the NNSS.
Therefore, the committee directs the Administrator of the
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to report to
the congressional defense committees, not later than March 31,
2022, on the institutional NNSA funding over the future years
nuclear security program, as well as minor and major
construction projects by rank order. The report shall also
address a long term strategy to ensure the NNSS has a stable
funding profile, so that it can plan accordingly to maintain a
healthy workforce and continue to be a center of excellence in
mission assignments that draw on the unique nature of the NNSS
to the NNSA and other elements of the national security
community.
Minor construction projects of the Department of Energy
Minor construction projects can be executed by the
Department of Energy (DOE) without specific authorization by
the Congress and are not subject to certain project management
controls outlined in departmental directives. The Congress
recently raised the cost threshold for these projects from
$10.0 million to $20.0 million. Other sections of this title
would raise the threshold to $25.0 million to account for
inflation. However, some offices--particularly in the National
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)--have suggested that a
cost threshold higher than $25.0 million would create
additional efficiencies. The committee directs the Comptroller
General of the United States to assess DOE's minor construction
threshold in the context of the NNSA's overall construction
activities and evaluate the effects that further raising the
$20.0 million limit might have. Based on this assessment, the
Comptroller General shall provide a briefing to the Committees
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives not later than March 31, 2022, with a report to
follow on a date mutually agreed upon by the committees and the
Comptroller General.
Performance of depleted uranium hexafluoride conversion facilities
The Department of Energy's Office of Environmental
Management (EM) operates conversion facilities at two former
gaseous diffusion plants that produced enriched uranium for
defense programs: the Portsmouth site, near Piketon, Ohio, and
the Paducah site in Paducah, Kentucky. These two facilities are
converting depleted uranium tails (DUF-6)--a byproduct of the
uranium enrichment process--to a more stable uranium oxide for
storage until final disposition as waste or for commercial
reuse. However, the Portsmouth facility began operating in 2010
and experienced several safety and reliability issues during
early operations, causing it to shut down in 2015 after two
safety incidents until January 2018. Moreover, the National
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has taken recent steps
to install equipment at the Portsmouth DUF-6 conversion
facility to reestablish a supply of depleted uranium feedstock
needed to modernize the nuclear weapons stockpile.
Based on the recent shutdown and current need for depleted
uranium, the committee directs the Comptroller General of the
United States to assess EM's plans for operating the DUF 6
conversion facilities and the extent to which the DUF-6
conversion facilities are meeting their performance objectives.
The assessment should also include the extent to which NNSA and
EM have integrated their plans for DUF-6 processing and
disposal, and EM's plans for and challenges with the final
disposition of uranium oxide and hydrofluoric acid.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to report its
findings to the congressional defense committees not later than
March 31, 2022 with periodic updates as agreed upon by the
Comptroller General and the congressional defense committees.
Report on options for maintaining W80-4, W87-1, and W93 program
schedules despite interruptions in strategic materials
availability
The committee notes that the National Nuclear Security
Administration's (NNSA) infrastructure for producing critical
strategic nuclear material commodities such as uranium,
plutonium, tritium, and lithium, has atrophied and is in dire
need of modernization and restoration if the United States is
to maintain a safe and effective nuclear weapons stockpile.
While the NNSA is currently investing significant resources to
recapitalize its legacy infrastructure for producing these
commodities, most of the associated projects are complex, long-
term efforts that will not reach full operational capability
for at least a decade.
Coincident to the restoration of these foundational
capabilities, the NNSA is executing a number of nuclear weapon
life extension and development programs to ensure the
capabilities provided by the nuclear weapons stockpile meet
Department of Defense (DOD) military and schedule requirements.
Each of these weapons programs is dependent upon steady,
uninterrupted supplies of strategic nuclear material
commodities in order to meet design and production milestones,
and the interplay of these materials and weapons projects must
be carefully managed to avoid unnecessary schedule delays. The
committee is encouraged by NNSA's recognition of this challenge
and its efforts to take steps to accelerate aspects of its
material commodities programs to reduce schedule risk from
interruptions in materials availability. However, the committee
believes that NNSA should also prepare rapidly executable
contingency plans, given the high level of concurrency, that
minimize the impact of any unforeseen delays or gaps in these
supply flows, should such delays or gaps arise. Accordingly,
the committee directs the Administrator of the NNSA to:
(1) Provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than August 31, 2021, on its
current contingency plans for maintaining existing
development and production schedules for the W80-4,
W87-1, and W93 programs in the event of significant
delays or interruptions in one or more of the nuclear
materials commodities noted above; and
(2) Submit a report to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, not later than March 1, 2022,
identifying additional options for reducing schedule
risks to weapons programs from significant delays or
interruptions in one or more of the nuclear materials
commodities noted above, including, but not limited to:
(a) opportunities for further accelerating
infrastructure recapitalization and strategic
nuclear material commodity capability
restoration projects;
(b) technical design solutions that may
reduce the demand for such commodities without
sacrificing weapon performance characteristics
needed to meet DOD military requirements; and
(c) options for design tradeoffs that may
reduce the demand for such commodities but
would require DOD acceptance of weapon
performance characteristics that do not meet
existing military requirements for the above-
identified weapons programs.
Additionally, for any options that require DOD acceptance
of weapon performance characteristics that do not meet existing
military requirements for the above-identified weapons
programs, the committee directs the Commander, U.S. Strategic
Command, not later than 90 days after submission of the report
outlined in subsection (2), to provide an assessment to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives of the: (1) Likely degradation in military
capabilities stemming from such tradeoffs; (2) The resulting
impact on the effectiveness and survivability of U.S. nuclear
forces; and (3) Any potential implications for U.S. Strategic
Command's capability to meet operational employment plans.
Review of Integrated Master Schedule and Program Management Plan for
Los Alamos pit production
The committee directs the Administrator of the National
Nuclear Security Administration to provide the Integrated
Master Schedule and Program Management Plan for the production
of 30 pits per year at the Los Alamos National Laboratory to
the congressional defense committees and the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) not later than February 28, 2022.
Further, the committee directs the Comptroller General of the
United States to review the Integrated Master Schedule and
Program Management Plan according to GAO best practices and to
provide a preliminary briefing to the congressional defense
committees not later than April 30, 2022, with a complete
assessment on the findings of this review to follow, not later
than December 31, 2022.
Review of plutonium infrastructure at the National Nuclear Security
Administration
At the direction of this committee in the Senate report
accompanying S. 4049 (S. Rept. 116-236) of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, the Comptroller General
of the United States is conducting periodic reviews of National
Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA) plutonium
modernization plans. The reviews include the requirements,
cost, schedule, and technology readiness levels, as
appropriate, of (1) The Los Alamos Plutonium Pit Production
Project (21-D-512) and associated plutonium modernization
operations at Los Alamos National Laboratory; (2) The Savannah
River Plutonium Processing Facility (21-D-511) and associated
modernization operations at the Savannah River Site; and (3)
The integration of these two projects with the NNSA's overall
plutonium operations and capability sustainment program.
In support of these reviews, the committee directs the
Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration
to provide all formal project documentation, such as critical
decision packages, to the Comptroller General when completed,
and to provide timely access to all other documentation and
officials needed by the Comptroller General to complete the
series of reviews.
Space and Atmospheric Burst Reporting System
The Space and Atmospheric Burst Reporting System (SABRS) is
a payload deployed on U.S. Government satellites to detect
nuclear detonations and is one of multiple technologies in a
space-based architecture of nuclear detonation detection
sensors. SABRS and the other space-based sensors developed by
the national laboratories, along with a supporting ground-based
infrastructure operated by the Air Force, comprise the U.S.
Nuclear Detonation Detection System (USNDS). The committee
supports the USNDS mission but remains concerned about the
USNDS governance structure and coordination between NNSA and
the Air Force on space-based sensors.
The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to undertake a review of the SABRS program, including
the following: (1) The status of the SABRS technology, the
schedule for its further development and deployment, and issues
that may affect its future deployment; (2) How well SABRS is
integrated into the related ground-based systems for processing
information from space-based sensors, how data from SABRS is
being or could be used by the Air Force and other component
organizations such as the U.S. Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM),
and if there are other challenges facing the SABRS program and
its integration into USNDS; and (3) The extent to which the Air
Force and USSTRATCOM are committed to the technology and
sustaining its deployment. The committee directs the
Comptroller General to provide to the congressional defense
committees a briefing on this review not later than March 1,
2022.
Status of verification and monitoring capabilities
The current administration has completed an agreement with
Russia to extend the terms of the New START treaty until 2026,
and the administration has indicated it intends to use this
time to negotiate a new nuclear weapons reduction treaty with
Russia. However, little is known about what verification and
monitoring approaches the administration may seek to negotiate
and potentially include as provisions in a new treaty.
Moreover, it has been suggested that a follow-on treaty to New
START, or a subsequent future nuclear weapons reduction treaty,
could seek to include limits on nonstrategic nuclear weapons or
have other limits that could further challenge verification and
monitoring efforts.
The committee believes that strong and effective
verification and monitoring mechanisms are central to the
integrity of any nuclear weapons reduction treaty and are
essential to maintaining strategic stability with fewer numbers
of nuclear weapons. The committee recognizes that the
verification and monitoring approaches of a future treaty may
need to be more sophisticated and diverse to maintain such
stability.
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of
the United States to undertake a comprehensive review of U.S.
nuclear weapons verification and monitoring capabilities,
including describing technical approaches under development,
the maturity of these approaches and their associated
technologies, and how the National Nuclear Security
Administration is coordinating with other agencies and
international partners to identify priorities and develop
suitable approaches and technologies. The Comptroller General
shall provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives on the status of
this review not later than May 1, 2022, with a report to be
provided at a time mutually agreed upon by the committees and
the Comptroller General.
Supply chain and quality assurance for the National Nuclear Security
Administration
As the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has reported
for decades, effective and efficient Department of Defense
(DOD) supply chain management is critical for supporting
readiness, capabilities, and for helping to ensure that
agencies avoid wasteful spending. Further, quality management
is recognized as a basic risk area for DOD manufacturing, and
the GAO has reported on quality management system-related
problems that have resulted in major cost overruns, schedule
delays, and reduced system performance for DOD systems.
Likewise, the Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) uses commercial sources for about 65
percent of the non-nuclear components found in nuclear weapons.
As GAO reviews have shown in areas such as the NNSA's high
performance computing, high explosives, micro-electronics, and
other materials such as depleted uranium, NNSA requirements for
material and component quality and uniformity are frequently
more demanding than industry standards. In addition, the NNSA
often finds that U.S. suppliers for some critical materials and
components are few to nonexistent. Furthermore, with a budget
that is a fraction of the DOD's and often episodic needs, in
many cases the NNSA cannot maintain a dedicated supplier base.
A recent quality assurance problem identified through
testing of commercially-procured capacitors for inclusion in
modernized nuclear weapons highlighted the need for the NNSA to
manage its supply chain risk differently and to have more
rigorous quality management systems in place for commercially-
sourced components and materials. An Incident Response Team
(IRT) conducted an after-action report assessing these issues
for the NNSA and recommended numerous actions. While the NNSA
does conduct enterprise-wide purchases of commercially
available equipment such as firearms, ammunition, and uniforms,
for many other specialized components and materials NNSA relies
on contractors to perform quality assurance testing. The IRT
identified a number of deficiencies with respect to the NNSA's
oversight of contractors' quality assurance activities as a
root cause of capacitor problem.
The committee directs the NNSA to report, not later than
April 1, 2022, to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives on actions it has taken
in response to the IRT's findings and recommendations, as well
as any additional actions planned. The committee further
directs the Comptroller General of the United States to review
the NNSA's report and provide a briefing to the committees on
the results of this review not later than 180 days after the
release of said report. As part of this review, the committee
directs the Comptroller General to assess the maturity of the
NNSA's quality management system as it relates to the nuclear
weapons supply chain.
Ten-year infrastructure and facilities plan for inertial confinement
fusion program
The committee notes that the inertial confinement fusion
(ICF) program is an integral part of the National Nuclear
Security Administration's (NNSA) stockpile science effort. It
also plays a key role in obtaining data for warhead life
extension programs under way. Given the importance of this
program, the committee directs the NNSA Administrator to submit
to the congressional defense committees, not later than March
31, 2022, a report on a 10-year strategic plan for
recapitalizing, upgrading, and maintaining ICF facilities to
address the recommendations of the JASON Defense Advisory Panel
review of the NNSA ICF program as well as to advance stockpile
stewardship and other national security missions. The plan
shall include: (1) The current operations and maintenance
status of each of the three major ICF facilities; (2) Current
and future challenges of operating and maintaining the three
major facilities; (3) The required resources and scope of work
needed to recapitalize and upgrade the three major facilities
to meet NNSA missions for at least the next decade; and (4) The
long-term costs to maintain each of the three major facilities
in a condition necessary to meet mission requirements.
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD
Authorization (sec. 3201)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
funding for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board at
$31.0 million, consistent with the budget request.
References to chairperson and vice chairperson of Defense Nuclear
Facilities Safety Board (sec. 3202)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
wording of certain sections of United States Code relating to
titles of members of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety
Board.
TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION
Maritime Administration (sec. 3501)
The committee recommends a provision that would reauthorize
certain aspects of the Maritime Administration.
DIVISION D--FUNDING TABLES
Authorization of amounts in funding tables (sec. 4001)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide for
the allocation of funds among programs, projects, and
activities in accordance with the tables in division D of this
Act, subject to reprogramming in accordance with established
procedures.
Consistent with the previously expressed views of the
committee, the provision would also require that decisions by
an agency head to commit, obligate, or expend funds to a
specific entity on the basis of such funding tables be based on
authorized, transparent, statutory criteria, or merit-based
selection procedures in accordance with the requirements of
sections 2304(k) and 2374 of title 10, United States Code, and
other applicable provisions of law.
SUMMARY OF NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022
SUMMARY OF NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022
(In Thousands of Dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2022 Request Senate Change Senate Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE
NATIONAL DEFENSE BASE BUDGET
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 051)
DIVISION A: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY............................ 2,806,452 328,000 3,134,452
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY............................. 3,556,251 132,000 3,688,251
PROCUREMENT OF W&TCV, ARMY............................ 3,875,893 658,032 4,533,925
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY....................... 2,158,110 281,062 2,439,172
OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY............................... 8,873,558 6,934 8,880,492
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY............................ 16,477,178 2,701,700 19,178,878
WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY............................. 4,220,705 120,700 4,341,405
PROCUREMENT OF AMMO, NAVY & MC........................ 988,018 41,600 1,029,618
SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY..................... 22,571,059 2,549,100 25,120,159
OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY............................... 10,875,912 644,200 11,520,112
PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS............................. 3,043,091 677,700 3,720,791
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE....................... 15,727,669 2,868,150 18,595,819
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE........................ 2,669,811 2,669,811
PROCUREMENT, SPACE FORCE.............................. 2,766,854 32,500 2,799,354
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE.................. 795,168 795,168
OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE.......................... 25,251,137 475,581 25,726,718
PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE............................. 5,548,212 332,192 5,880,404
SUBTOTAL, TITLE I--PROCUREMENT........................ 132,205,078 11,849,451 144,054,529
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, ARMY.............. 12,799,645 306,204 13,105,849
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, NAVY.............. 22,639,362 1,124,500 23,763,862
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, AF................ 39,179,649 915,700 40,095,349
RDTE, SPACE FORCE..................................... 11,271,066 524,100 11,795,166
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, DW................ 25,857,875 1,251,560 27,109,435
OPERATIONAL TEST & EVAL, DEFENSE...................... 216,591 20,000 236,591
SUBTOTAL, TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND 111,964,188 4,142,064 116,106,252
EVALUATION...........................................
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY......................... 54,616,397 2,525,737 57,142,134
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES..................... 3,000,635 -6,995 2,993,640
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG......................... 7,647,209 -27,976 7,619,233
AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND...................... 2,385,905 2,385,905
AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND...................... 941,905 941,905
COUNTER ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND (CTEF).............. 522,000 522,000
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY......................... 60,441,228 1,419,725 61,860,953
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS................. 9,024,791 160,485 9,185,276
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES..................... 1,148,698 -17,495 1,131,203
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE................... 285,050 38,205 323,255
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE.................... 53,876,475 2,247,745 56,124,220
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, SPACE FORCE.................. 3,440,712 311,200 3,751,912
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE................... 3,352,106 -34,295 3,317,811
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG.......................... 6,574,020 -16,975 6,557,045
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE................. 0 -644,145 -644,145
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE............... 44,918,366 805,641 45,724,007
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.......................... 1,448,355 25,000 1,473,355
SUBTOTAL, TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE........ 253,623,852 6,785,857 260,409,709
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL
MILITARY PERSONNEL.................................... 157,947,920 -496,612 157,451,308
MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH FUND CONTRIBUTIONS... 9,337,175 9,337,175
SUBTOTAL, TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL................ 167,285,095 -496,612 166,788,483
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
WORKING CAPITAL FUND.................................. 1,902,000 1,902,000
CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION................... 1,094,352 1,094,352
DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEF.......... 821,908 821,908
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL....................... 438,363 438,363
DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM................................ 35,592,407 30,000 35,622,407
SUBTOTAL, TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS............. 39,849,030 30,000 39,879,030
TOTAL, DIVISION A: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 704,927,243 22,310,760 727,238,003
AUTHORIZATIONS.......................................
DIVISION B: MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
Army.................................................. 834,692 753,000 1,587,692
Navy.................................................. 2,368,352 1,336,050 3,704,402
Air Force............................................. 2,102,690 230,250 2,332,940
Defense-Wide.......................................... 1,957,289 39,680 1,996,969
Army National Guard................................... 257,103 182,300 439,403
Air National Guard.................................... 213,770 166,200 379,970
Army Reserve.......................................... 64,911 58,400 123,311
Navy Reserve.......................................... 71,804 71,804
Air Force Reserve..................................... 78,374 85,700 164,074
NATO Security Investment Program...................... 205,853 205,853
SUBTOTAL, MILITARY CONSTRUCTION....................... 8,154,838 2,851,580 11,006,418
FAMILY HOUSING
Construction, Army.................................... 99,849 99,849
O&M, Army............................................. 391,227 391,227
Construction, Navy and Marine Corps................... 77,616 77,616
O&M, Navy and Marine Corps............................ 357,341 357,341
Construction, Air Force............................... 115,716 115,716
O&M, Air Force........................................ 325,445 325,445
O&M, Defense-Wide..................................... 49,785 49,785
Improvement Fund...................................... 6,081 6,081
Unaccmp HSG Improvement Fund.......................... 494 494
SUBTOTAL, FAMILY HOUSING.............................. 1,423,554 1,423,554
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
Army BRAC............................................. 65,301 65,301
Navy BRAC............................................. 111,155 111,155
Air Force BRAC........................................ 104,216 104,216
DOD BRAC.............................................. 3,967 3,967
SUBTOTAL, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE................ 284,639 284,639
TOTAL, DIVISION B: MILITARY CONSTRUCTION 9,863,031 2,851,580 12,714,611
AUTHORIZATIONS.......................................
TOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (BUDGET SUB- 714,790,274 25,162,340 739,952,614
FUNCTION 051)........................................
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 053)
DIVISION C: DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AND INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY AUTHORIZATIONS
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AUTHORIZATIONS
ENERGY PROGRAMS
NUCLEAR ENERGY........................................ 149,800 149,800
SUBTOTAL, ENERGY PROGRAMS............................. 149,800 0 149,800
NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
FEDERAL SALARIES AND EXPENSES......................... 464,000 464,000
WEAPONS ACTIVITIES.................................... 15,484,295 271,450 15,755,745
DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION...................... 1,934,000 57,000 1,991,000
NAVAL REACTORS........................................ 1,860,705 1,860,705
SUBTOTAL, NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.... 19,743,000 328,450 20,071,450
ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES
DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP......................... 6,841,670 -268,670 6,573,000
OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES.............................. 1,170,000 -250,000 920,000
SUBTOTAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES.... 8,011,670 -518,670 7,493,000
SUBTOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AUTHORIZATIONS......... 27,904,470 -190,220 27,714,250
INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY AUTHORIZATION
DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILTIIES SAFETY BOARD............... 31,000 31,000
SUBTOTAL, INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY AUTHORIZATION.... 31,000 0 31,000
TOTAL, DIVISION C: DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL 27,935,470 -190,220 27,745,250
SECURITY AND INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY
AUTHORIZATIONS.......................................
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 27,935,470 -190,220 27,745,250
053).................................................
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE (BUDGET FUNCTION 050)......... 742,725,744 24,972,120 767,697,864
MEMORANDUM: NON-DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE XIV--ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME (FUNCTION 600) 64,300 64,300
MEMORANDUM: TRANSFER AUTHORITIES (NON-ADDS)
TITLE X--GENERAL TRANSFER AUTHORITY................... [8,000,000] [6,000,000]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT
TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT
SEC. 4101. PROCUREMENT.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4101. PROCUREMENT (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2022 Request Senate Change Senate Authorized
Line Item -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Qty Cost Qty Cost Qty Cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AIRCRAFT
PROCUREMENT, ARMY
FIXED WING
3 FUTURE UAS FAMILY. 0 0 8 73,000 8 73,000
Army UFR--Replace [8] [73,000]
Shadow UAS in 8
BCTs.............
4 SMALL UNMANNED 0 16,005 0 16,005
AIRCRAFT SYSTEM..
ROTARY
7 AH-64 APACHE BLOCK 30 504,136 30 504,136
IIIA REMAN.......
8 AH-64 APACHE BLOCK 0 192,230 0 192,230
IIIA REMAN.......
10 UH-60 BLACKHAWK M 24 630,263 24 630,263
MODEL (MYP)......
11 UH-60 BLACKHAWK M 0 146,068 0 146,068
MODEL (MYP)......
12 UH-60 BLACK HAWK L 24 166,205 24 166,205
AND V MODELS.....
13 CH-47 HELICOPTER.. 6 145,218 5 252,000 11 397,218
Army UFR--Support [5] [252,000]
minimum
sustainment rate.
14 CH-47 HELICOPTER.. 0 18,559 0 18,559
MODIFICATION OF
AIRCRAFT
17 GRAY EAGLE MODS2.. 0 3,143 0 3,143
18 MULTI SENSOR ABN 0 127,665 0 127,665
RECON............
19 AH-64 MODS........ 0 118,560 0 118,560
20 CH-47 CARGO 0 9,918 0 3,000 0 12,918
HELICOPTER MODS
(MYP)............
CH-47 cargo [0] [3,000]
aircraft
modifications....
21 GRCS SEMA MODS.... 0 2,762 0 2,762
22 ARL SEMA MODS..... 0 9,437 0 9,437
23 EMARSS SEMA MODS.. 0 1,568 0 1,568
24 UTILITY/CARGO 0 8,530 0 8,530
AIRPLANE MODS....
25 UTILITY HELICOPTER 0 15,826 0 15,826
MODS.............
26 NETWORK AND 0 29,206 0 29,206
MISSION PLAN.....
27 COMMS, NAV 0 58,117 0 58,117
SURVEILLANCE.....
29 AVIATION ASSURED 0 47,028 0 47,028
PNT..............
30 GATM ROLLUP....... 0 16,776 0 16,776
32 UAS MODS.......... 0 3,840 0 3,840
GROUND SUPPORT
AVIONICS
33 AIRCRAFT 0 64,561 0 64,561
SURVIVABILITY
EQUIPMENT........
34 SURVIVABILITY CM.. 0 5,104 0 5,104
35 CMWS.............. 0 148,570 0 148,570
36 COMMON INFRARED 101 240,412 101 240,412
COUNTERMEASURES
(CIRCM)..........
OTHER SUPPORT
38 COMMON GROUND 0 13,561 0 13,561
EQUIPMENT........
39 AIRCREW INTEGRATED 0 41,425 0 41,425
SYSTEMS..........
40 AIR TRAFFIC 0 21,759 0 21,759
CONTROL..........
TOTAL AIRCRAFT 185 2,806,452 13 328,000 198 3,134,452
PROCUREMENT, ARMY
MISSILE
PROCUREMENT, ARMY
SURFACE-TO-AIR
MISSILE SYSTEM
2 LOWER TIER AIR AND 0 35,473 0 35,473
MISSILE DEFENSE
(AMD) SEN........
3 M-SHORAD-- 37 331,575 37 331,575
PROCUREMENT......
4 MSE MISSILE....... 180 776,696 180 776,696
5 PRECISION STRIKE 110 166,130 110 166,130
MISSILE (PRSM)...
6 INDIRECT FIRE 0 25,253 0 25,253
PROTECTION
CAPABILITY INC 2-
I................
AIR-TO-SURFACE
MISSILE SYSTEM
7 HELLFIRE SYS 802 118,800 802 118,800
SUMMARY..........
8 JOINT AIR-TO- 386 152,177 293 67,000 679 219,177
GROUND MSLS
(JAGM)...........
Army UFR-- [293] [67,000]
Additional JAGM
procurement......
9 LONG RANGE 179 44,744 179 44,744
PRECISION
MUNITION.........
ANTI-TANK/ASSAULT
MISSILE SYS
10 JAVELIN (AAWS-M) 376 120,842 67 15,000 443 135,842
SYSTEM SUMMARY...
Army UFR--Light [67] [15,000]
Weight Command
Launch Units.....
11 TOW 2 SYSTEM 887 104,412 887 104,412
SUMMARY..........
12 GUIDED MLRS ROCKET 5,817 935,917 300 50,000 6,117 985,917
(GMLRS)..........
Army UFR--Restores [300] [50,000]
GMLRS procurement
13 MLRS REDUCED RANGE 3,048 29,574 3,048 29,574
PRACTICE ROCKETS
(RRPR)...........
14 HIGH MOBILITY 19 128,438 19 128,438
ARTILLERY ROCKET
SYSTEM (HIMARS...
16 LETHAL MINIATURE 900 68,278 900 68,278
AERIAL MISSILE
SYSTEM (LMAMS....
MODIFICATIONS
17 PATRIOT MODS...... 0 205,469 0 205,469
21 AVENGER MODS...... 0 11,227 0 11,227
22 ITAS/TOW MODS..... 0 4,561 0 4,561
23 MLRS MODS......... 0 273,856 0 273,856
24 HIMARS 0 7,192 0 7,192
MODIFICATIONS....
SPARES AND REPAIR
PARTS
25 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 5,019 0 5,019
PARTS............
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
& FACILITIES
26 AIR DEFENSE 0 10,618 0 10,618
TARGETS..........
TOTAL MISSILE 12,741 3,556,251 660 132,000 13,401 3,688,251
PROCUREMENT, ARMY
PROCUREMENT OF
W&TCV, ARMY
TRACKED COMBAT
VEHICLES
1 ARMORED MULTI 0 104,727 0 104,727
PURPOSE VEHICLE
(AMPV)...........
2 ASSAULT BREACHER 0 16,454 0 16,454
VEHICLE (ABV)....
3 MOBILE PROTECTED 23 286,977 23 286,977
FIREPOWER........
MODIFICATION OF
TRACKED COMBAT
VEHICLES
5 STRYKER UPGRADE... 187 1,005,028 187 1,005,028
6 BRADLEY PROGRAM 0 461,385 138 56,969 138 518,354
(MOD)............
Army UFR--Improved [138] [56,969]
Bradley
Acquisition
System upgrade...
7 M109 FOV 0 2,534 0 2,534
MODIFICATIONS....
8 PALADIN INTEGRATED 25 446,430 15 199,500 40 645,930
MANAGEMENT (PIM).
Army UFR--PIM [15] [199,500]
increase.........
9 IMPROVED RECOVERY 0 52,059 0 52,059
VEHICLE (M88A2
HERCULES)........
10 ASSAULT BRIDGE 0 2,136 0 2,136
(MOD)............
13 JOINT ASSAULT 23 110,773 23 110,773
BRIDGE...........
15 ABRAMS UPGRADE 70 981,337 22 369,000 92 1,350,337
PROGRAM..........
Army UFR--Abrams [22] [369,000]
ARNG M1A2SEPv3
fielding.........
16 VEHICLE PROTECTION 0 80,286 0 80,286
SYSTEMS (VPS)....
WEAPONS & OTHER
COMBAT VEHICLES
18 MULTI-ROLE ANTI- 0 31,623 0 31,623
ARMOR ANTI-
PERSONNEL WEAPON
S................
19 MORTAR SYSTEMS.... 0 37,485 200 12,853 200 50,338
Army UFR--120mm [200] [12,853]
mortar cannon....
20 XM320 GRENADE 0 8,666 0 8,666
LAUNCHER MODULE
(GLM)............
21 PRECISION SNIPER 0 11,040 0 11,040
RIFLE............
23 CARBINE........... 0 4,434 0 4,434
24 NEXT GENERATION 0 97,087 0 97,087
SQUAD WEAPON.....
26 HANDGUN........... 0 4,930 0 4,930
MOD OF WEAPONS AND
OTHER COMBAT VEH
27 MK-19 GRENADE 0 13,027 0 13,027
MACHINE GUN MODS.
28 M777 MODS......... 0 21,976 0 1,795 0 23,771
Army UFR--Software [0] [1,795]
Defined Radio-
Hardware
Integration Kits.
30 M2 50 CAL MACHINE 0 3,612 1,060 17,915 1,060 21,527
GUN MODS.........
Army UFR-- [1,060] [17,915]
Additional M2A1s
for MATVs........
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
& FACILITIES
36 ITEMS LESS THAN 0 1,068 0 1,068
$5.0M (WOCV-WTCV)
37 PRODUCTION BASE 0 90,819 0 90,819
SUPPORT (WOCV-
WTCV)............
TOTAL PROCUREMENT 328 3,875,893 1,435 658,032 1,763 4,533,925
OF W&TCV, ARMY...
PROCUREMENT OF
AMMUNITION, ARMY
SMALL/MEDIUM CAL
AMMUNITION
1 CTG, 5.56MM, ALL 0 47,490 0 32,400 0 79,890
TYPES............
Army UFR--Enhanced [0] [32,400]
Performance Round
and Tracer.......
2 CTG, 7.62MM, ALL 0 74,870 0 74,870
TYPES............
3 NEXT GENERATION 0 76,794 0 76,794
SQUAD WEAPON
AMMUNITION.......
4 CTG, HANDGUN, ALL 0 7,812 0 7,812
TYPES............
5 CTG, .50 CAL, ALL 0 29,716 0 29,716
TYPES............
6 CTG, 20MM, ALL 0 4,371 0 4,371
TYPES............
8 CTG, 30MM, ALL 0 34,511 0 34,511
TYPES............
9 CTG, 40MM, ALL 0 35,231 0 14,000 0 49,231
TYPES............
Army UFR--MK19 [0] [14,000]
training and war
reserves.........
MORTAR AMMUNITION
10 60MM MORTAR, ALL 0 23,219 0 23,219
TYPES............
11 81MM MORTAR, ALL 0 52,135 0 52,135
TYPES............
12 120MM MORTAR, ALL 0 104,144 0 104,144
TYPES............
TANK AMMUNITION
13 CARTRIDGES, TANK, 0 224,503 14,410 99,318 14,410 323,821
105MM AND 120MM,
ALL TYPES........
Army UFR--Tank [14,410] [99,318]
main gun ammo....
ARTILLERY
AMMUNITION
14 ARTILLERY 0 26,709 0 26,709
CARTRIDGES, 75MM
& 105MM, ALL
TYPES............
15 ARTILLERY 0 174,015 31,997 30,844 31,997 204,859
PROJECTILE,
155MM, ALL TYPES.
Army UFR-- [31,997] [30,844]
Additional
inventory........
16 PROJ 155MM 350 73,498 350 73,498
EXTENDED RANGE
M982.............
17 ARTILLERY 0 150,873 0 150,873
PROPELLANTS,
FUZES AND
PRIMERS, ALL.....
MINES
18 MINES & CLEARING 0 25,980 0 25,980
CHARGES, ALL
TYPES............
19 CLOSE TERRAIN 0 34,761 0 34,761
SHAPING OBSTACLE.
ROCKETS
20 SHOULDER LAUNCHED 0 24,408 0 24,408
MUNITIONS, ALL
TYPES............
21 ROCKET, HYDRA 70, 0 109,536 0 109,536
ALL TYPES........
OTHER AMMUNITION
22 CAD/PAD, ALL TYPES 0 6,549 0 6,549
23 DEMOLITION 0 27,904 0 27,904
MUNITIONS, ALL
TYPES............
24 GRENADES, ALL 0 37,437 0 37,437
TYPES............
25 SIGNALS, ALL TYPES 0 7,530 0 7,530
26 SIMULATORS, ALL 0 8,350 0 8,350
TYPES............
27 REACTIVE ARMOR 0 17,755 0 17,755
TILES............
MISCELLANEOUS
28 AMMO COMPONENTS, 0 2,784 0 2,784
ALL TYPES........
29 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 17,797 0 17,797
MILLION (AMMO)...
30 AMMUNITION 0 12,290 0 12,290
PECULIAR
EQUIPMENT........
31 FIRST DESTINATION 0 4,331 0 4,331
TRANSPORTATION
(AMMO)...........
32 CLOSEOUT 0 99 0 99
LIABILITIES......
PRODUCTION BASE
SUPPORT
34 INDUSTRIAL 0 538,120 0 104,500 0 642,620
FACILITIES.......
Army UFR-- [0] [40,000]
Demolition of
Legacy Nitrate
Esters
(Nitroglycerin)
NG1 Facility,
Radford Army
Ammunition Plant
(RFAAP), Virginia
Army UFR-- [0] [40,000]
Environmental,
Safety,
Construction,
Maintenance and
Repair of GOCO
Facilities in VA,
TN, MO, PA, & IA.
Army UFR-- [0] [12,000]
Pyrotechnics
Energetic
Capability (PEC)
construction at
Lake City Army
Ammunition Plant
(LCAAP), Missouri
Army UFR--Solvent [0] [12,500]
Propellant
Facility,
Preliminary
Design, Radford
Army Ammunition
Plant, Virginia..
35 CONVENTIONAL 0 139,410 0 139,410
MUNITIONS
DEMILITARIZATION.
36 ARMS INITIATIVE... 0 3,178 0 3,178
TOTAL PROCUREMENT 350 2,158,110 46,407 281,062 46,757 2,439,172
OF AMMUNITION,
ARMY.............
OTHER PROCUREMENT,
ARMY
TACTICAL VEHICLES
2 SEMITRAILERS, 0 12,539 50 6,392 50 18,931
FLATBED:.........
Army UFR--M872 [50] [6,392]
semitrailer......
3 SEMITRAILERS, 0 17,985 0 17,985
TANKERS..........
4 HI MOB MULTI-PURP 0 60,706 0 60,706
WHLD VEH (HMMWV).
5 GROUND MOBILITY 0 29,807 0 5,000 0 34,807
VEHICLES (GMV)...
Infantry Squad [0] [5,000]
Vehicle..........
8 JOINT LIGHT 0 574,562 340 120,000 340 694,562
TACTICAL VEHICLE
FAMILY OF VEHICL.
Army UFR-- [340] [120,000]
Additional JLTV
fielding.........
9 TRUCK, DUMP, 20T 0 9,882 0 9,882
(CCE)............
10 FAMILY OF MEDIUM 0 36,885 0 36,885
TACTICAL VEH
(FMTV)...........
11 FAMILY OF COLD 0 16,450 0 16,450
WEATHER ALL-
TERRAIN VEHICLE
(C...............
12 FIRETRUCKS & 0 26,256 0 26,256
ASSOCIATED
FIREFIGHTING
EQUIP............
13 FAMILY OF HEAVY 0 64,282 0 64,282
TACTICAL VEHICLES
(FHTV)...........
14 PLS ESP........... 0 16,943 0 16,943
17 TACTICAL WHEELED 0 17,957 0 17,957
VEHICLE
PROTECTION KITS..
18 MODIFICATION OF IN 0 29,349 0 29,349
SVC EQUIP........
NON-TACTICAL
VEHICLES
20 PASSENGER CARRYING 0 1,232 0 1,232
VEHICLES.........
21 NONTACTICAL 0 24,246 0 24,246
VEHICLES, OTHER..
COMM--JOINT
COMMUNICATIONS
22 SIGNAL 0 140,036 0 2,500 0 142,536
MODERNIZATION
PROGRAM..........
Army UFR--Multi- [0] [2,500]
Domain Task Force
All-Domain
Operations Center
cloud pilot......
23 TACTICAL NETWORK 0 436,524 0 436,524
TECHNOLOGY MOD IN
SVC..............
25 DISASTER INCIDENT 0 3,863 0 3,863
RESPONSE COMMS
TERMINAL (DI.....
26 JCSE EQUIPMENT 0 4,845 0 4,845
(USRDECOM).......
COMM--SATELLITE
COMMUNICATIONS
29 DEFENSE ENTERPRISE 0 97,369 0 97,369
WIDEBAND SATCOM
SYSTEMS..........
30 TRANSPORTABLE 0 120,550 0 120,550
TACTICAL COMMAND
COMMUNICATIONS...
31 SHF TERM.......... 0 38,129 0 38,129
32 ASSURED 0 115,291 0 115,291
POSITIONING,
NAVIGATION AND
TIMING...........
33 SMART-T (SPACE)... 0 15,407 0 15,407
34 GLOBAL BRDCST SVC-- 0 2,763 0 2,763
GBS..............
COMM--C3 SYSTEM
37 COE TACTICAL 0 99,858 0 99,858
SERVER
INFRASTRUCTURE
(TSI)............
COMM--COMBAT
COMMUNICATIONS
38 HANDHELD MANPACK 0 775,069 0 775,069
SMALL FORM FIT
(HMS)............
40 ARMY LINK 16 0 17,749 0 17,749
SYSTEMS..........
42 UNIFIED COMMAND 0 17,984 0 17,984
SUITE............
43 COTS 0 191,702 0 191,702
COMMUNICATIONS
EQUIPMENT........
44 FAMILY OF MED COMM 0 15,957 0 15,957
FOR COMBAT
CASUALTY CARE....
45 ARMY 0 89,441 0 89,441
COMMUNICATIONS &
ELECTRONICS......
COMM--INTELLIGENCE
COMM
47 CI AUTOMATION 0 13,317 0 13,317
ARCHITECTURE-
INTEL............
48 DEFENSE MILITARY 0 5,207 0 5,207
DECEPTION
INITIATIVE.......
49 MULTI-DOMAIN 0 20,095 0 20,095
INTELLIGENCE.....
INFORMATION
SECURITY
51 INFORMATION SYSTEM 0 987 0 987
SECURITY PROGRAM-
ISSP.............
52 COMMUNICATIONS 0 126,273 0 126,273
SECURITY (COMSEC)
53 DEFENSIVE CYBER 0 27,389 0 4,100 0 31,489
OPERATIONS.......
Army UFR-- [0] [4,100]
Cybersecurity /
IT Network
Mapping..........
56 SIO CAPABILITY.... 0 21,303 0 21,303
57 BIOMETRIC ENABLING 0 914 0 914
CAPABILITY (BEC).
COMM--LONG HAUL
COMMUNICATIONS
59 BASE SUPPORT 0 9,209 0 9,209
COMMUNICATIONS...
COMM--BASE
COMMUNICATIONS
60 INFORMATION 0 219,026 0 219,026
SYSTEMS..........
61 EMERGENCY 0 4,875 0 4,875
MANAGEMENT
MODERNIZATION
PROGRAM..........
64 INSTALLATION INFO 0 223,001 0 2,040 0 225,041
INFRASTRUCTURE
MOD PROGRAM......
EUCOM UFR--Mission [0] [2,040]
Partner
Environment......
ELECT EQUIP--TACT
INT REL ACT
(TIARA)
67 JTT/CIBS-M........ 0 5,463 0 5,463
68 TERRESTRIAL LAYER 0 39,240 0 39,240
SYSTEMS (TLS)....
70 DCGS-A-INTEL...... 0 92,613 48 26,950 48 119,563
Army UFR-- [48] [26,950]
Additional fixed
node cloud
servers..........
71 JOINT TACTICAL 0 8,088 0 8,088
GROUND STATION
(JTAGS)-INTEL....
72 TROJAN............ 0 30,828 0 30,828
73 MOD OF IN-SVC 0 39,039 0 39,039
EQUIP (INTEL SPT)
74 BIOMETRIC TACTICAL 0 11,097 0 11,097
COLLECTION
DEVICES..........
ELECT EQUIP--
ELECTRONIC
WARFARE (EW)
76 EW PLANNING & 0 783 0 783
MANAGEMENT TOOLS
(EWPMT)..........
77 AIR VIGILANCE (AV) 0 13,486 0 13,486
79 FAMILY OF 0 14,414 0 14,414
PERSISTENT
SURVEILLANCE CAP.
80 COUNTERINTELLIGENC 0 19,111 0 19,111
E/SECURITY
COUNTERMEASURES..
81 CI MODERNIZATION.. 0 421 0 421
ELECT EQUIP--
TACTICAL SURV.
(TAC SURV)
82 SENTINEL MODS..... 0 47,642 0 47,642
83 NIGHT VISION 0 1,092,341 0 -269,766 0 822,575
DEVICES..........
Program reduction-- [0] [-269,766]
IVAS early to
need.............
84 SMALL TACTICAL 0 21,103 0 21,103
OPTICAL RIFLE
MOUNTED MLRF.....
85 INDIRECT FIRE 0 6,153 0 6,153
PROTECTION FAMILY
OF SYSTEMS.......
86 FAMILY OF WEAPON 0 184,145 0 184,145
SIGHTS (FWS).....
87 ENHANCED PORTABLE 0 2,371 0 2,371
INDUCTIVE
ARTILLERY FUZE SE
88 FORWARD LOOKING 0 11,929 0 11,929
INFRARED (IFLIR).
89 COUNTER SMALL 0 60,058 0 60,058
UNMANNED AERIAL
SYSTEM (C-SUAS)..
90 JOINT BATTLE 0 263,661 0 263,661
COMMAND--PLATFORM
(JBC-P)..........
91 JOINT EFFECTS 0 62,082 0 62,082
TARGETING SYSTEM
(JETS)...........
93 COMPUTER 0 2,811 0 2,811
BALLISTICS: LHMBC
XM32.............
94 MORTAR FIRE 0 17,236 0 17,236
CONTROL SYSTEM...
95 MORTAR FIRE 0 2,830 0 2,830
CONTROL SYSTEMS
MODIFICATIONS....
96 COUNTERFIRE RADARS 0 31,694 0 31,694
ELECT EQUIP--
TACTICAL C2
SYSTEMS
97 ARMY COMMAND POST 0 49,410 0 49,410
INTEGRATED
INFRASTRUCTURE (.
98 FIRE SUPPORT C2 0 9,853 0 9,853
FAMILY...........
99 AIR & MSL DEFENSE 0 67,193 0 67,193
PLANNING &
CONTROL SYS......
100 IAMD BATTLE 0 301,872 0 301,872
COMMAND SYSTEM...
101 LIFE CYCLE 0 5,182 0 5,182
SOFTWARE SUPPORT
(LCSS)...........
102 NETWORK MANAGEMENT 0 31,349 0 31,349
INITIALIZATION
AND SERVICE......
104 GLOBAL COMBAT 0 11,271 0 11,271
SUPPORT SYSTEM-
ARMY (GCSS-A)....
105 INTEGRATED 0 16,077 0 16,077
PERSONNEL AND PAY
SYSTEM-ARMY (IPP.
107 MOD OF IN-SVC 0 3,160 0 3,160
EQUIPMENT
(ENFIRE).........
ELECT EQUIP--
AUTOMATION
108 ARMY TRAINING 0 9,833 0 9,833
MODERNIZATION....
109 AUTOMATED DATA 0 130,924 0 3,000 0 133,924
PROCESSING EQUIP.
Army UFR--ATRRS [0] [3,000]
unlimited data
rights...........
110 ACCESSIONS 0 44,635 0 44,635
INFORMATION
ENVIRONMENT (AIE)
111 GENERAL FUND 0 1,452 0 1,452
ENTERPRISE
BUSINESS SYSTEMS
FAM..............
112 HIGH PERF 0 69,943 0 69,943
COMPUTING MOD PGM
(HPCMP)..........
113 CONTRACT WRITING 0 16,957 0 16,957
SYSTEM...........
114 CSS COMMUNICATIONS 0 73,110 0 73,110
115 RESERVE COMPONENT 0 12,905 0 12,905
AUTOMATION SYS
(RCAS)...........
ELECT EQUIP--
SUPPORT
117 BCT EMERGING 0 13,835 0 13,835
TECHNOLOGIES.....
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 18,304 0 18,304
PROGRAMS.........
CHEMICAL DEFENSIVE
EQUIPMENT
119 BASE DEFENSE 0 62,295 0 62,295
SYSTEMS (BDS)....
120 CBRN DEFENSE...... 0 55,632 0 11,300 0 66,932
CNGB UFR--Man [0] [11,300]
portable
radiological
detection system.
BRIDGING EQUIPMENT
122 TACTICAL BRIDGING. 0 9,625 0 9,625
123 TACTICAL BRIDGE, 0 76,082 0 76,082
FLOAT-RIBBON.....
124 BRIDGE 0 19,867 0 19,867
SUPPLEMENTAL SET.
125 COMMON BRIDGE 0 109,796 0 109,796
TRANSPORTER (CBT)
RECAP............
ENGINEER (NON-
CONSTRUCTION)
EQUIPMENT
126 HANDHELD STANDOFF 0 5,628 0 5,628
MINEFIELD
DETECTION SYS-HST
128 HUSKY MOUNTED 0 26,823 96 48,336 96 75,159
DETECTION SYSTEM
(HMDS)...........
Army UFR-- [96] [48,336]
Additional HMDS..
131 ROBOTICS AND 0 124,233 213 10,004 213 134,237
APPLIQUE SYSTEMS.
Army UFR--Common [213] [10,004]
Robotic System-
Individual (CRS-
I)...............
132 RENDER SAFE SETS 0 84,000 6 3,158 6 87,158
KITS OUTFITS.....
Army UFR-- [6] [3,158]
Additional render
safe equipment...
COMBAT SERVICE
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
134 HEATERS AND ECU'S. 0 7,116 0 7,116
135 SOLDIER 0 1,286 0 1,286
ENHANCEMENT......
136 PERSONNEL RECOVERY 0 9,741 0 9,741
SUPPORT SYSTEM
(PRSS)...........
137 GROUND SOLDIER 0 150,244 0 150,244
SYSTEM...........
138 MOBILE SOLDIER 0 17,815 0 17,815
POWER............
139 FORCE PROVIDER.... 0 28,860 0 28,860
140 FIELD FEEDING 0 2,321 0 2,321
EQUIPMENT........
141 CARGO AERIAL DEL & 0 40,240 0 40,240
PERSONNEL
PARACHUTE SYSTEM.
142 FAMILY OF ENGR 0 36,163 0 36,163
COMBAT AND
CONSTRUCTION SETS
PETROLEUM
EQUIPMENT
144 QUALITY 0 744 0 744
SURVEILLANCE
EQUIPMENT........
145 DISTRIBUTION 0 72,296 57 4,420 57 76,716
SYSTEMS,
PETROLEUM & WATER
Army UFR--Modular [57] [4,420]
Fuel System (MFS)
MEDICAL EQUIPMENT
146 COMBAT SUPPORT 0 122,145 0 122,145
MEDICAL..........
MAINTENANCE
EQUIPMENT
147 MOBILE MAINTENANCE 0 14,756 0 14,756
EQUIPMENT SYSTEMS
CONSTRUCTION
EQUIPMENT
154 ALL TERRAIN CRANES 0 112,784 0 112,784
156 CONST EQUIP ESP... 0 8,694 0 8,694
RAIL FLOAT
CONTAINERIZATION
EQUIPMENT
158 ARMY WATERCRAFT 0 44,409 1 13,600 1 58,009
ESP..............
Army UFR--Landing [1] [13,600]
Craft Utility
modernization....
159 MANEUVER SUPPORT 0 76,660 0 76,660
VESSEL (MSV).....
GENERATORS
161 GENERATORS AND 0 47,606 0 47,606
ASSOCIATED EQUIP.
162 TACTICAL ELECTRIC 0 10,500 0 10,500
POWER
RECAPITALIZATION.
MATERIAL HANDLING
EQUIPMENT
163 FAMILY OF 0 13,325 0 13,325
FORKLIFTS........
TRAINING EQUIPMENT
164 COMBAT TRAINING 0 79,565 0 79,565
CENTERS SUPPORT..
165 TRAINING DEVICES, 0 174,644 0 174,644
NONSYSTEM........
166 SYNTHETIC TRAINING 0 122,104 0 122,104
ENVIRONMENT (STE)
168 GAMING TECHNOLOGY 0 11,642 0 11,642
IN SUPPORT OF
ARMY TRAINING....
TEST MEASURE AND
DIG EQUIPMENT
(TMD)
170 INTEGRATED FAMILY 0 42,934 0 42,934
OF TEST EQUIPMENT
(IFTE)...........
172 TEST EQUIPMENT 399 24,304 399 24,304
MODERNIZATION
(TEMOD)..........
OTHER SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
174 PHYSICAL SECURITY 0 86,930 0 86,930
SYSTEMS (OPA3)...
175 BASE LEVEL COMMON 0 27,823 0 27,823
EQUIPMENT........
176 MODIFICATION OF IN- 0 32,392 0 15,900 0 48,292
SVC EQUIPMENT
(OPA-3)..........
Expeditionary [0] [15,900]
solid waste
disposal system..
177 BUILDING, PRE-FAB, 0 32,227 0 32,227
RELOCATABLE......
179 SPECIAL EQUIPMENT 0 76,917 0 76,917
FOR TEST AND
EVALUATION.......
OPA2
180 INITIAL SPARES-- 0 9,272 0 9,272
C&E..............
TOTAL OTHER 399 8,873,558 811 6,934 1,210 8,880,492
PROCUREMENT, ARMY
AIRCRAFT
PROCUREMENT, NAVY
COMBAT AIRCRAFT
1 F/A-18E/F 0 87,832 0 87,832
(FIGHTER) HORNET.
3 JOINT STRIKE 20 2,111,009 5 535,000 25 2,646,009
FIGHTER CV.......
Navy UFR-- [5] [535,000]
Additional F-35C.
4 JOINT STRIKE 0 246,781 0 246,781
FIGHTER CV.......
5 JSF STOVL......... 17 2,256,829 17 2,256,829
6 JSF STOVL......... 0 216,720 482 128,800 482 345,520
Marine Corps UFR-- [482] [128,800]
F-35 peculiar
ground support
equipment........
7 CH-53K (HEAVY 9 1,286,296 2 250,000 11 1,536,296
LIFT)............
Additional [2] [250,000]
aircraft.........
8 CH-53K (HEAVY 0 182,871 0 182,871
LIFT)............
9 V-22 (MEDIUM LIFT) 8 751,716 4 372,000 12 1,123,716
Marine Corps UFR-- [0] [18,000]
MV-22 nacelle
maintenance
stands...........
Marine Corps UFR-- [0] [15,000]
MV-22 support
equipment........
Marine Corps UFR-- [0] [4,600]
MV-22 tooling for
WESTPAC..........
Navy UFR-- [4] [334,400]
Additional V-22B.
11 H-1 UPGRADES (UH- 0 939 0 939
1Y/AH-1Z)........
13 P-8A POSEIDON..... 0 44,595 0 44,595
14 E-2D ADV HAWKEYE.. 5 766,788 1 191,000 6 957,788
Navy UFR-- [1] [191,000]
Additional E-2D..
15 E-2D ADV HAWKEYE.. 0 118,095 0 118,095
TRAINER AIRCRAFT
16 ADVANCED 36 163,490 36 163,490
HELICOPTER
TRAINING SYSTEM..
OTHER AIRCRAFT
17 KC-130J........... 6 520,787 5 535,200 11 1,055,987
Marine Corps UFR-- [1] [31,500]
KC-130J weapons
system trainer...
Marine Corps UFR-- [2] [197,900]
Replace KC-130J
aircraft.........
Navy UFR-- [2] [305,800]
Additional C-130J-
30...............
18 KC-130J........... 0 68,088 0 68,088
21 MQ-4 TRITON....... 0 160,151 2 323,000 2 483,151
Additional [2] [323,000]
aircraft.........
23 MQ-8 UAV.......... 0 49,249 0 49,249
24 STUASL0 UAV....... 0 13,151 0 13,151
25 MQ-25............. 0 47,468 0 47,468
27 MARINE GROUP 5 UAS 6 233,686 6 60,000 12 293,686
Marine Corps UFR-- [2] [40,000]
Additional
aircraft.........
Marine Corps UFR-- [4] [20,000]
Additional ground
control stations.
MODIFICATION OF
AIRCRAFT
30 F-18 A-D UNIQUE... 0 163,095 104 82,500 104 245,595
Marine Corps UFR-- [96] [55,000]
F-18 ALR-67(V)5
radar warning
receiver.........
Marine Corps UFR-- [8] [27,500]
F-18C/D AESA
radar upgrade....
31 F-18E/F AND EA-18G 0 482,899 0 482,899
MODERNIZATION AND
SUSTAINM.........
32 MARINE GROUP 5 UAS 0 1,982 0 1,982
SERIES...........
33 AEA SYSTEMS....... 0 23,296 0 23,296
34 AV-8 SERIES....... 0 17,882 0 17,882
35 INFRARED SEARCH 0 138,827 0 138,827
AND TRACK (IRST).
36 ADVERSARY......... 0 143,571 4 12,400 4 155,971
Marine Corps UFR-- [4] [12,400]
Upgrade of
current VMFT-401
adversary
aircraft.........
37 F-18 SERIES....... 0 327,571 0 327,571
38 H-53 SERIES....... 0 112,436 0 112,436
39 MH-60 SERIES...... 0 94,794 0 94,794
40 H-1 SERIES........ 0 124,194 0 124,194
41 EP-3 SERIES....... 0 28,848 0 28,848
42 E-2 SERIES........ 0 204,826 0 204,826
43 TRAINER A/C SERIES 0 7,849 0 7,849
44 C-2A.............. 0 2,843 0 2,843
45 C-130 SERIES...... 0 145,610 0 145,610
46 FEWSG............. 0 734 0 734
47 CARGO/TRANSPORT A/ 0 10,682 0 10,682
C SERIES.........
48 E-6 SERIES........ 0 128,029 0 128,029
49 EXECUTIVE 0 45,326 0 45,326
HELICOPTERS
SERIES...........
51 T-45 SERIES....... 0 158,772 0 158,772
52 POWER PLANT 0 24,915 0 24,915
CHANGES..........
53 JPATS SERIES...... 0 22,955 0 22,955
54 AVIATION LIFE 0 2,477 0 2,477
SUPPORT MODS.....
55 COMMON ECM 0 119,574 24 7,600 24 127,174
EQUIPMENT........
Marine Corps UFR-- [24] [7,600]
F-18 ALE-39 to
ALE-47 retrofit..
56 COMMON AVIONICS 0 118,839 0 118,839
CHANGES..........
57 COMMON DEFENSIVE 0 5,476 0 5,476
WEAPON SYSTEM....
58 ID SYSTEMS........ 0 13,154 0 13,154
59 P-8 SERIES........ 0 131,298 2 30,700 2 161,998
Navy UFR--P-8A Inc [2] [30,700]
III kits.........
60 MAGTF EW FOR 0 29,151 0 6,300 0 35,451
AVIATION.........
Marine Corps UFR-- [0] [6,300]
Increase EW of AN/
ALQ-231(V)3......
61 MQ-8 SERIES....... 0 31,624 0 31,624
62 V-22 (TILT/ROTOR 0 312,835 18 39,300 18 352,135
ACFT) OSPREY.....
Marine Corps UFR-- [18] [39,300]
MV-22 Mesh
Network Manager..
63 NEXT GENERATION 0 266,676 0 266,676
JAMMER (NGJ).....
64 F-35 STOVL SERIES. 0 177,054 0 177,054
65 F-35 CV SERIES.... 0 138,269 0 138,269
66 QRC............... 0 98,563 0 98,563
67 MQ-4 SERIES....... 0 7,100 0 7,100
68 RQ-21 SERIES...... 0 14,123 0 14,123
AIRCRAFT SPARES
AND REPAIR PARTS
72 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 2,339,077 4 127,900 4 2,466,977
PARTS............
Marine Corps UFR-- [4] [117,800]
F-35B engine
spares...........
Marine Corps UFR-- [0] [7,000]
KC-130J initial
spares...........
Marine Corps UFR-- [0] [3,100]
KC-130J weapons
system trainer
initial spares...
AIRCRAFT SUPPORT
EQUIP &
FACILITIES
73 COMMON GROUND 0 517,267 0 517,267
EQUIPMENT........
74 AIRCRAFT 0 80,500 0 80,500
INDUSTRIAL
FACILITIES.......
75 WAR CONSUMABLES... 0 42,496 0 42,496
76 OTHER PRODUCTION 0 21,374 0 21,374
CHARGES..........
77 SPECIAL SUPPORT 0 271,774 0 271,774
EQUIPMENT........
TOTAL AIRCRAFT 107 16,477,178 663 2,701,700 770 19,178,878
PROCUREMENT, NAVY
WEAPONS
PROCUREMENT, NAVY
MODIFICATION OF
MISSILES
1 TRIDENT II MODS... 0 1,144,446 0 1,144,446
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
& FACILITIES
2 MISSILE INDUSTRIAL 0 7,319 0 7,319
FACILITIES.......
STRATEGIC MISSILES
3 TOMAHAWK.......... 60 124,513 60 124,513
TACTICAL MISSILES
5 SIDEWINDER........ 178 86,366 178 86,366
6 STANDARD MISSILE.. 125 521,814 125 521,814
7 STANDARD MISSILE.. 0 45,357 0 45,357
8 JASSM............. 25 37,039 25 37,039
9 SMALL DIAMETER 180 40,877 180 40,877
BOMB II..........
10 RAM............... 100 92,981 100 92,981
11 JOINT AIR GROUND 164 49,702 164 49,702
MISSILE (JAGM)...
12 HELLFIRE.......... 120 7,557 120 7,557
13 AERIAL TARGETS.... 0 150,339 0 150,339
14 DRONES AND DECOYS. 18 30,321 18 30,321
15 OTHER MISSILE 0 3,474 0 12,600 0 16,074
SUPPORT..........
Marine Corps UFR-- [0] [12,600]
AGM-167A Griffin.
16 LRASM............. 48 161,212 48 161,212
17 NAVAL STRIKE 34 59,331 0 53,900 34 113,231
MISSILE (NSM)....
Navy UFR-- [0] [53,900]
Additional NSM...
MODIFICATION OF
MISSILES
18 TOMAHAWK MODS..... 0 206,233 0 206,233
19 ESSM.............. 108 248,619 108 248,619
21 AARGM............. 54 116,345 54 116,345
22 STANDARD MISSILES 0 148,834 0 148,834
MODS.............
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
& FACILITIES
23 WEAPONS INDUSTRIAL 0 1,819 0 1,819
FACILITIES.......
ORDNANCE SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
26 ORDNANCE SUPPORT 0 191,905 0 191,905
EQUIPMENT........
TORPEDOES AND
RELATED EQUIP
27 SSTD.............. 0 4,545 0 4,545
28 MK-48 TORPEDO..... 58 159,107 0 49,900 58 209,007
Navy UFR-- [0] [49,900]
Heavyweight
Torpedo (HWT)
quantity increase
29 ASW TARGETS....... 0 13,630 0 13,630
MOD OF TORPEDOES
AND RELATED EQUIP
30 MK-54 TORPEDO MODS 0 106,112 0 106,112
31 MK-48 TORPEDO 0 35,680 0 35,680
ADCAP MODS.......
32 MARITIME MINES.... 0 8,567 0 8,567
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
33 TORPEDO SUPPORT 0 93,400 0 93,400
EQUIPMENT........
34 ASW RANGE SUPPORT. 0 3,997 0 3,997
DESTINATION
TRANSPORTATION
35 FIRST DESTINATION 0 4,023 0 4,023
TRANSPORTATION...
GUNS AND GUN
MOUNTS
36 SMALL ARMS AND 0 14,909 0 14,909
WEAPONS..........
MODIFICATION OF
GUNS AND GUN
MOUNTS
37 CIWS MODS......... 0 6,274 0 6,274
38 COAST GUARD 0 45,958 0 45,958
WEAPONS..........
39 GUN MOUNT MODS.... 0 68,775 0 68,775
40 LCS MODULE WEAPONS 14 2,121 14 2,121
41 AIRBORNE MINE 0 14,822 0 14,822
NEUTRALIZATION
SYSTEMS..........
SPARES AND REPAIR
PARTS
43 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 162,382 0 4,300 0 166,682
PARTS............
Navy UFR--Maritime [0] [4,300]
outfitting and
interim spares...
TOTAL WEAPONS 1,286 4,220,705 0 120,700 1,286 4,341,405
PROCUREMENT, NAVY
PROCUREMENT OF
AMMO, NAVY & MC
NAVY AMMUNITION
1 GENERAL PURPOSE 0 48,635 0 48,635
BOMBS............
2 JDAM.............. 2,971 74,140 2,971 74,140
3 AIRBORNE ROCKETS, 0 75,383 0 75,383
ALL TYPES........
4 MACHINE GUN 0 11,215 0 11,215
AMMUNITION.......
5 PRACTICE BOMBS.... 0 52,225 0 52,225
6 CARTRIDGES & CART 0 70,876 0 70,876
ACTUATED DEVICES.
7 AIR EXPENDABLE 0 61,600 20,926 41,600 20,926 103,200
COUNTERMEASURES..
Marine Corps UFR-- [20,926] [41,600]
Additional units.
8 JATOS............. 0 6,620 0 6,620
9 5 INCH/54 GUN 0 28,922 0 28,922
AMMUNITION.......
10 INTERMEDIATE 0 36,038 0 36,038
CALIBER GUN
AMMUNITION.......
11 OTHER SHIP GUN 0 39,070 0 39,070
AMMUNITION.......
12 SMALL ARMS & 0 45,493 0 45,493
LANDING PARTY
AMMO.............
13 PYROTECHNIC AND 0 9,163 0 9,163
DEMOLITION.......
15 AMMUNITION LESS 0 1,575 0 1,575
THAN $5 MILLION..
MARINE CORPS
AMMUNITION
16 MORTARS........... 0 50,707 0 50,707
17 DIRECT SUPPORT 0 120,037 0 120,037
MUNITIONS........
18 INFANTRY WEAPONS 0 94,001 0 94,001
AMMUNITION.......
19 COMBAT SUPPORT 0 35,247 0 35,247
MUNITIONS........
20 AMMO MODERNIZATION 0 16,267 0 16,267
21 ARTILLERY 0 105,669 0 105,669
MUNITIONS........
22 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 5,135 0 5,135
MILLION..........
TOTAL PROCUREMENT 2,971 988,018 20,926 41,600 23,897 1,029,618
OF AMMO, NAVY &
MC...............
SHIPBUILDING AND
CONVERSION, NAVY
FLEET BALLISTIC
MISSILE SHIPS
1 OHIO REPLACEMENT 0 3,003,000 0 3,003,000
SUBMARINE........
2 OHIO REPLACEMENT 0 1,643,980 0 130,000 0 1,773,980
SUBMARINE........
Submarine [0] [130,000]
industrial base
development......
OTHER WARSHIPS
3 CARRIER 0 1,068,705 0 1,068,705
REPLACEMENT
PROGRAM..........
4 CVN-81............ 0 1,299,764 0 1,299,764
5 VIRGINIA CLASS 2 4,249,240 2 4,249,240
SUBMARINE........
6 VIRGINIA CLASS 0 2,120,407 0 2,120,407
SUBMARINE........
7 CVN REFUELING 0 2,456,018 0 2,456,018
OVERHAULS........
8 CVN REFUELING 0 66,262 0 66,262
OVERHAULS........
9 DDG 1000.......... 0 56,597 0 15,000 0 71,597
Navy UFR--DDG-1001 [0] [15,000]
combat system
activation.......
10 DDG-51............ 1 2,016,787 1 1,659,000 2 3,675,787
Navy UFR--Arleigh [1] [1,659,000]
Burke-class
destroyer DDG-51.
11 DDG-51 AP......... 0 0 0 175,000 0 175,000
FY23 3rd DDG LLTM. [0] [125,000]
Surface combatant [0] [50,000]
supplier base....
13 FFG-FRIGATE....... 1 1,087,900 1 1,087,900
14 FFG-FRIGATE....... 0 69,100 0 69,100
AMPHIBIOUS SHIPS
15 LPD FLIGHT II..... 0 60,636 0 60,636
16 LPD FLIGHT II..... 0 0 0 250,000 0 250,000
Program increase.. [0] [250,000]
19 LHA REPLACEMENT... 0 68,637 0 350,000 0 418,637
Program increase.. [0] [350,000]
20 EXPEDITIONARY FAST 0 0 1 270,000 1 270,000
TRANSPORT (EPF)..
Program increase.. [1] [270,000]
AUXILIARIES, CRAFT
AND PRIOR YR
PROGRAM COST
21 TAO FLEET OILER... 1 668,184 1 668,184
22 TAO FLEET OILER... 0 76,012 0 76,012
23 TAGOS SURTASS 1 434,384 1 434,384
SHIPS............
24 TOWING, SALVAGE, 2 183,800 2 183,800
AND RESCUE SHIP
(ATS)............
25 LCU 1700.......... 4 67,928 4 67,928
26 OUTFITTING........ 0 655,707 0 655,707
27 SHIP TO SHORE 2 156,738 2 156,738
CONNECTOR........
28 SERVICE CRAFT..... 0 67,866 0 67,866
29 LCAC SLEP......... 2 32,712 2 32,712
30 AUXILIARY VESSELS 5 299,900 -5 -299,900 0 0
(USED SEALIFT)...
Program reduction. [-5] [-299,900]
31 COMPLETION OF PY 0 660,795 0 660,795
SHIPBUILDING
PROGRAMS.........
TOTAL SHIPBUILDING 21 22,571,059 -3 2,549,100 18 25,120,159
AND CONVERSION,
NAVY.............
OTHER PROCUREMENT,
NAVY
SHIP PROPULSION
EQUIPMENT
1 SURFACE POWER 0 41,414 0 41,414
EQUIPMENT........
GENERATORS
2 SURFACE COMBATANT 0 83,746 0 83,746
HM&E.............
NAVIGATION
EQUIPMENT
3 OTHER NAVIGATION 0 72,300 0 72,300
EQUIPMENT........
OTHER SHIPBOARD
EQUIPMENT
4 SUB PERISCOPE, 0 234,932 0 234,932
IMAGING AND SUPT
EQUIP PROG.......
5 DDG MOD........... 0 583,136 0 583,136
6 FIREFIGHTING 0 15,040 0 15,040
EQUIPMENT........
7 COMMAND AND 0 2,194 0 2,194
CONTROL
SWITCHBOARD......
8 LHA/LHD MIDLIFE... 0 133,627 0 133,627
9 LCC 19/20 EXTENDED 0 4,387 0 4,387
SERVICE LIFE
PROGRAM..........
10 POLLUTION CONTROL 0 18,159 0 18,159
EQUIPMENT........
11 SUBMARINE SUPPORT 0 88,284 0 88,284
EQUIPMENT........
12 VIRGINIA CLASS 0 22,669 0 22,669
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
13 LCS CLASS SUPPORT 0 9,640 0 9,640
EQUIPMENT........
14 SUBMARINE 0 21,834 0 21,834
BATTERIES........
15 LPD CLASS SUPPORT 0 34,292 0 34,292
EQUIPMENT........
16 DDG 1000 CLASS 0 126,107 0 126,107
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
17 STRATEGIC PLATFORM 0 12,256 0 12,256
SUPPORT EQUIP....
18 DSSP EQUIPMENT.... 0 10,682 0 10,682
19 CG MODERNIZATION.. 0 156,951 0 36,700 0 193,651
Navy UFR--CG [0] [36,700]
Modernization
Pricing..........
20 LCAC.............. 0 21,314 0 21,314
21 UNDERWATER EOD 0 24,146 0 24,146
EQUIPMENT........
22 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 84,789 0 84,789
MILLION..........
23 CHEMICAL WARFARE 0 2,997 0 2,997
DETECTORS........
REACTOR PLANT
EQUIPMENT
25 SHIP MAINTENANCE, 0 1,307,651 0 167,400 0 1,475,051
REPAIR AND
MODERNIZATION....
Navy UFR--A-120 [0] [167,400]
availability.....
26 REACTOR POWER 0 3,270 0 3,270
UNITS............
27 REACTOR COMPONENTS 0 438,729 0 438,729
OCEAN ENGINEERING
28 DIVING AND SALVAGE 0 10,772 0 10,772
EQUIPMENT........
SMALL BOATS
29 STANDARD BOATS.... 0 58,770 0 58,770
PRODUCTION
FACILITIES
EQUIPMENT
30 OPERATING FORCES 0 168,822 0 168,822
IPE..............
OTHER SHIP SUPPORT
31 LCS COMMON MISSION 0 74,231 0 74,231
MODULES EQUIPMENT
32 LCS MCM MISSION 0 40,630 0 40,630
MODULES..........
33 LCS ASW MISSION 0 1,565 0 1,565
MODULES..........
34 LCS SUW MISSION 0 3,395 0 3,395
MODULES..........
35 LCS IN-SERVICE 0 122,591 0 122,591
MODERNIZATION....
36 SMALL & MEDIUM UUV 0 32,534 0 32,534
SHIP SONARS
38 SPQ-9B RADAR...... 0 15,927 0 15,927
39 AN/SQQ-89 SURF ASW 0 131,829 0 131,829
COMBAT SYSTEM....
40 SSN ACOUSTIC 0 379,850 0 379,850
EQUIPMENT........
41 UNDERSEA WARFARE 0 13,965 0 13,965
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
ASW ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT
42 SUBMARINE ACOUSTIC 0 24,578 0 24,578
WARFARE SYSTEM...
43 SSTD.............. 0 11,010 0 11,010
44 FIXED SURVEILLANCE 0 363,651 0 363,651
SYSTEM...........
45 SURTASS........... 0 67,500 0 67,500
ELECTRONIC WARFARE
EQUIPMENT
46 AN/SLQ-32......... 0 370,559 0 370,559
RECONNAISSANCE
EQUIPMENT
47 SHIPBOARD IW 0 261,735 0 261,735
EXPLOIT..........
48 AUTOMATED 0 3,777 0 3,777
IDENTIFICATION
SYSTEM (AIS).....
OTHER SHIP
ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT
49 COOPERATIVE 0 24,641 0 36,900 0 61,541
ENGAGEMENT
CAPABILITY.......
Navy UFR-- [0] [23,600]
Accelerate Naval
Tactical Grid
Development for
Joint All-Domain
Command and
Control (JADC2)..
Navy UFR--Maritime [0] [13,300]
outfitting and
interim spares...
50 NAVAL TACTICAL 0 14,439 0 2,200 0 16,639
COMMAND SUPPORT
SYSTEM (NTCSS)...
Navy UFR--Naval [0] [2,200]
Operational
Business
Logistics
Enterprise
(NOBLE)..........
51 ATDLS............. 0 101,595 0 101,595
52 NAVY COMMAND AND 0 3,535 0 3,535
CONTROL SYSTEM
(NCCS)...........
53 MINESWEEPING 0 15,640 0 15,640
SYSTEM
REPLACEMENT......
54 SHALLOW WATER MCM. 0 5,610 0 5,610
55 NAVSTAR GPS 0 33,097 0 33,097
RECEIVERS (SPACE)
56 AMERICAN FORCES 0 2,513 0 2,513
RADIO AND TV
SERVICE..........
57 STRATEGIC PLATFORM 0 4,823 0 4,823
SUPPORT EQUIP....
AVIATION
ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT
58 ASHORE ATC 0 83,464 0 83,464
EQUIPMENT........
59 AFLOAT ATC 0 67,055 0 67,055
EQUIPMENT........
60 ID SYSTEMS........ 0 46,918 0 46,918
61 JOINT PRECISION 0 35,386 0 35,386
APPROACH AND
LANDING SYSTEM (.
62 NAVAL MISSION 0 17,951 0 17,951
PLANNING SYSTEMS.
OTHER SHORE
ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT
63 MARITIME 0 2,360 0 2,360
INTEGRATED
BROADCAST SYSTEM.
64 TACTICAL/MOBILE 0 18,919 0 18,919
C4I SYSTEMS......
65 DCGS-N............ 0 16,691 0 16,691
66 CANES............. 0 412,002 0 48,000 0 460,002
Navy UFR-- [0] [48,000]
Resilient
Communications
PNT for Combat
Logistics Fleet
(CLF)............
67 RADIAC............ 0 9,074 0 9,074
68 CANES-INTELL...... 0 51,593 0 51,593
69 GPETE............. 0 23,930 0 23,930
70 MASF.............. 0 8,795 0 8,795
71 INTEG COMBAT 0 5,829 0 5,829
SYSTEM TEST
FACILITY.........
72 EMI CONTROL 0 3,925 0 3,925
INSTRUMENTATION..
73 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 156,042 0 25,200 0 181,242
MILLION..........
Navy UFR--CVN-78 [0] [25,200]
Dual Band Radar
and DDG-1000
Multifunction
Radar: Signal
Data Processor
Tech Refresh and
Obsolete
Component
Redesign.........
SHIPBOARD
COMMUNICATIONS
74 SHIPBOARD TACTICAL 0 43,212 0 43,212
COMMUNICATIONS...
75 SHIP 0 90,724 0 10,500 0 101,224
COMMUNICATIONS
AUTOMATION.......
Navy UFR-- [0] [5,500]
Accelerate Naval
Tactical Grid
Development for
Joint All-Domain
Command and
Control (JADC2)..
Navy UFR-- [0] [5,000]
Resilient
Communications
and PNT for
Combat Logistics
Fleet (CLF)......
76 COMMUNICATIONS 0 44,447 0 44,447
ITEMS UNDER $5M..
SUBMARINE
COMMUNICATIONS
77 SUBMARINE 0 47,579 0 47,579
BROADCAST SUPPORT
78 SUBMARINE 0 64,642 0 64,642
COMMUNICATION
EQUIPMENT........
SATELLITE
COMMUNICATIONS
79 SATELLITE 0 38,636 0 38,636
COMMUNICATIONS
SYSTEMS..........
80 NAVY MULTIBAND 0 34,723 0 34,723
TERMINAL (NMT)...
SHORE
COMMUNICATIONS
81 JOINT 0 2,651 0 2,651
COMMUNICATIONS
SUPPORT ELEMENT
(JCSE)...........
CRYPTOGRAPHIC
EQUIPMENT
82 INFO SYSTEMS 0 146,879 0 146,879
SECURITY PROGRAM
(ISSP)...........
83 MIO INTEL 0 977 0 977
EXPLOITATION TEAM
CRYPTOLOGIC
EQUIPMENT
84 CRYPTOLOGIC 0 17,809 0 17,809
COMMUNICATIONS
EQUIP............
OTHER ELECTRONIC
SUPPORT
92 COAST GUARD 0 63,214 0 63,214
EQUIPMENT........
SONOBUOYS
94 SONOBUOYS--ALL 0 249,121 0 54,400 0 303,521
TYPES............
Navy UFR-- [0] [54,400]
Additional
sonobuoys........
AIRCRAFT SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
95 MINOTAUR.......... 0 4,963 0 4,963
96 WEAPONS RANGE 0 98,898 0 98,898
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
97 AIRCRAFT SUPPORT 0 178,647 0 178,647
EQUIPMENT........
98 ADVANCED ARRESTING 0 22,265 0 22,265
GEAR (AAG).......
99 METEOROLOGICAL 0 13,687 0 13,687
EQUIPMENT........
100 LEGACY AIRBORNE 0 4,446 0 4,446
MCM..............
101 LAMPS EQUIPMENT... 0 1,470 0 1,470
102 AVIATION SUPPORT 0 70,665 0 70,665
EQUIPMENT........
103 UMCS-UNMAN CARRIER 0 86,584 0 86,584
AVIATION(UCA)MISS
ION CNTRL........
SHIP GUN SYSTEM
EQUIPMENT
104 SHIP GUN SYSTEMS 0 5,536 0 5,536
EQUIPMENT........
SHIP MISSILE
SYSTEMS EQUIPMENT
105 HARPOON SUPPORT 0 204 0 204
EQUIPMENT........
106 SHIP MISSILE 0 237,987 0 42,500 0 280,487
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
Navy UFR-- [0] [42,500]
Additional OTH-WS
107 TOMAHAWK SUPPORT 0 88,726 0 88,726
EQUIPMENT........
FBM SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
108 STRATEGIC MISSILE 0 281,259 0 281,259
SYSTEMS EQUIP....
ASW SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
109 SSN COMBAT CONTROL 0 143,289 0 143,289
SYSTEMS..........
110 ASW SUPPORT 0 30,595 0 30,595
EQUIPMENT........
OTHER ORDNANCE
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
111 EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE 0 1,721 0 1,721
DISPOSAL EQUIP...
112 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 8,746 0 8,746
MILLION..........
OTHER EXPENDABLE
ORDNANCE
113 ANTI-SHIP MISSILE 0 76,994 0 76,994
DECOY SYSTEM.....
114 SUBMARINE TRAINING 0 75,813 0 75,813
DEVICE MODS......
115 SURFACE TRAINING 0 127,814 0 127,814
EQUIPMENT........
CIVIL ENGINEERING
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
116 PASSENGER CARRYING 0 4,140 0 4,140
VEHICLES.........
117 GENERAL PURPOSE 0 2,805 0 2,805
TRUCKS...........
118 CONSTRUCTION & 0 48,403 0 48,403
MAINTENANCE EQUIP
119 FIRE FIGHTING 0 15,084 0 15,084
EQUIPMENT........
120 TACTICAL VEHICLES. 0 27,400 0 27,400
121 POLLUTION CONTROL 0 2,607 0 2,607
EQUIPMENT........
122 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 51,963 0 51,963
MILLION..........
123 PHYSICAL SECURITY 0 1,165 0 1,165
VEHICLES.........
SUPPLY SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
124 SUPPLY EQUIPMENT.. 0 24,698 0 24,698
125 FIRST DESTINATION 0 5,385 0 5,385
TRANSPORTATION...
126 SPECIAL PURPOSE 0 660,750 0 660,750
SUPPLY SYSTEMS...
TRAINING DEVICES
127 TRAINING SUPPORT 0 3,465 0 3,465
EQUIPMENT........
128 TRAINING AND 0 60,114 0 60,114
EDUCATION
EQUIPMENT........
COMMAND SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
129 COMMAND SUPPORT 0 31,007 0 31,007
EQUIPMENT........
130 MEDICAL SUPPORT 0 7,346 0 18,800 0 26,146
EQUIPMENT........
Navy UFR-- [0] [18,800]
Expeditionary
medical readiness
132 NAVAL MIP SUPPORT 0 2,887 0 2,887
EQUIPMENT........
133 OPERATING FORCES 0 12,815 0 12,815
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
134 C4ISR EQUIPMENT... 0 6,324 0 6,324
135 ENVIRONMENTAL 0 25,098 0 25,098
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
136 PHYSICAL SECURITY 0 110,647 0 110,647
EQUIPMENT........
137 ENTERPRISE 0 31,709 0 31,709
INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY.......
OTHER
141 NEXT GENERATION 0 41 0 41
ENTERPRISE
SERVICE..........
142 CYBERSPACE 0 12,859 0 12,859
ACTIVITIES.......
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 19,808 0 19,808
PROGRAMS.........
SPARES AND REPAIR
PARTS
143 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 424,405 0 201,600 0 626,005
PARTS............
Navy UFR--DDG-1000 [0] [108,900]
and CVN-78 Dual
Band Radar spares
Navy UFR--Maritime [0] [92,700]
outfitting and
interim spares...
TOTAL OTHER 0 10,875,912 0 644,200 0 11,520,112
PROCUREMENT, NAVY
PROCUREMENT,
MARINE CORPS
TRACKED COMBAT
VEHICLES
1 AAV7A1 PIP........ 0 36,836 0 36,836
2 AMPHIBIOUS COMBAT 92 532,355 92 532,355
VEHICLE FAMILY OF
VEHICLES.........
3 LAV PIP........... 0 23,476 0 23,476
ARTILLERY AND
OTHER WEAPONS
4 155MM LIGHTWEIGHT 0 32 0 32
TOWED HOWITZER...
5 ARTILLERY WEAPONS 0 67,548 83 153,800 83 221,348
SYSTEM...........
Marine Corps UFR-- [35] [57,800]
Ground-launched
anti-ship
missiles.........
Marine Corps UFR-- [48] [96,000]
Ground-launched
long range fires.
6 WEAPONS AND COMBAT 0 35,402 0 35,402
VEHICLES UNDER $5
MILLION..........
GUIDED MISSILES
8 GROUND BASED AIR 0 9,349 0 9,349
DEFENSE..........
9 ANTI-ARMOR MISSILE- 1 937 1 937
JAVELIN..........
10 FAMILY ANTI-ARMOR 0 20,481 0 20,481
WEAPON SYSTEMS
(FOAAWS).........
11 ANTI-ARMOR MISSILE- 0 14,359 0 14,359
TOW..............
12 GUIDED MLRS ROCKET 654 98,299 654 98,299
(GMLRS)..........
COMMAND AND
CONTROL SYSTEMS
13 COMMON AVIATION 0 18,247 0 18,247
COMMAND AND
CONTROL SYSTEM (C
REPAIR AND TEST
EQUIPMENT
14 REPAIR AND TEST 0 33,554 0 33,554
EQUIPMENT........
OTHER SUPPORT
(TEL)
15 MODIFICATION KITS. 0 167 0 167
COMMAND AND
CONTROL SYSTEM
(NON-TEL)
16 ITEMS UNDER $5 0 64,879 3,342 68,900 3,342 133,779
MILLION (COMM &
ELEC)............
Marine Corps UFR-- [0] [9,000]
Fly-Away
Broadcast System.
Marine Corps UFR-- [261] [16,900]
INOD Block III
long-range sight.
Marine Corps UFR-- [3,081] [43,000]
Squad binocular
night vision
goggle...........
17 AIR OPERATIONS C2 0 1,291 0 2,000 0 3,291
SYSTEMS..........
Marine Corps UFR-- [0] [2,000]
CEC (AN/USG-4B)..
RADAR + EQUIPMENT
(NON-TEL)
19 GROUND/AIR TASK 8 297,369 52 348,000 60 645,369
ORIENTED RADAR (G/
ATOR)............
Marine Corps UFR-- [8] [304,000]
Additional G/ATOR
units............
Marine Corps UFR-- [44] [44,000]
Additional radar
retrofit kits and
FRP systems......
INTELL/COMM
EQUIPMENT (NON-
TEL)
20 GCSS-MC........... 0 604 0 604
21 FIRE SUPPORT 0 39,810 0 39,810
SYSTEM...........
22 INTELLIGENCE 0 67,309 1,068 5,600 1,068 72,909
SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
Marine Corps UFR-- [1,068] [5,600]
SCINet equipment.
24 UNMANNED AIR 0 24,299 0 24,299
SYSTEMS (INTEL)..
25 DCGS-MC........... 0 28,633 0 28,633
26 UAS PAYLOADS...... 0 3,730 0 3,730
OTHER SUPPORT (NON-
TEL)
29 NEXT GENERATION 0 97,060 0 19,000 0 116,060
ENTERPRISE
NETWORK (NGEN)...
Marine Corps UFR-- [0] [19,000]
Network
infrastructure
compliance/NGEN..
30 COMMON COMPUTER 0 83,606 0 13,800 0 97,406
RESOURCES........
Marine Corps UFR-- [0] [6,300]
MC Hardware Suite
End User Devices
refresh..........
Marine Corps UFR-- [0] [7,500]
Secure
Operational
Network
Infrastructure
and
Communications
modernization....
31 COMMAND POST 0 53,708 0 53,708
SYSTEMS..........
32 RADIO SYSTEMS..... 0 468,678 0 468,678
33 COMM SWITCHING & 0 49,600 0 49,600
CONTROL SYSTEMS..
34 COMM & ELEC 0 110,835 0 5,800 0 116,635
INFRASTRUCTURE
SUPPORT..........
Marine Corps UFR-- [0] [5,800]
Base
telecommunication
s equipment
upgrades.........
35 CYBERSPACE 0 25,377 24 21,200 24 46,577
ACTIVITIES.......
Marine Corps UFR-- [24] [21,200]
Defensive Cyber
Ops-Internal
Defensive
Measures suites..
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 4,034 0 4,034
PROGRAMS.........
ADMINISTRATIVE
VEHICLES
38 COMMERCIAL CARGO 0 17,848 0 17,848
VEHICLES.........
TACTICAL VEHICLES
39 MOTOR TRANSPORT 0 23,363 0 23,363
MODIFICATIONS....
40 JOINT LIGHT 613 322,013 613 322,013
TACTICAL VEHICLE.
42 TRAILERS.......... 0 9,876 0 9,876
ENGINEER AND OTHER
EQUIPMENT
44 TACTICAL FUEL 0 2,161 0 2,161
SYSTEMS..........
45 POWER EQUIPMENT 0 26,625 0 26,625
ASSORTED.........
46 AMPHIBIOUS SUPPORT 0 17,119 0 17,119
EQUIPMENT........
47 EOD SYSTEMS....... 0 94,472 85 13,200 85 107,672
Marine Corps UFR-- [0] [7,800]
BCWD/UnSAT/
Explosive Hazard
Defeat Systems...
Marine Corps UFR-- [85] [5,400]
ENFIRE/Explosive
Hazard Defeat
Systems..........
MATERIALS HANDLING
EQUIPMENT
48 PHYSICAL SECURITY 0 84,513 0 84,513
EQUIPMENT........
GENERAL PROPERTY
49 FIELD MEDICAL 0 8,105 0 8,105
EQUIPMENT........
50 TRAINING DEVICES.. 0 37,814 0 37,814
51 FAMILY OF 0 34,658 0 15,800 0 50,458
CONSTRUCTION
EQUIPMENT........
Marine Corps UFR-- [0] [10,800]
All-terrain crane
Marine Corps UFR-- [0] [5,000]
Rough terrain
container handler
52 ULTRA-LIGHT 0 15,439 0 15,439
TACTICAL VEHICLE
(ULTV)...........
OTHER SUPPORT
53 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 4,402 108 10,600 108 15,002
MILLION..........
Marine Corps UFR-- [108] [10,600]
Lightweight water
purification
system...........
SPARES AND REPAIR
PARTS
54 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 32,819 0 32,819
PARTS............
TOTAL PROCUREMENT, 1,368 3,043,091 4,762 677,700 6,130 3,720,791
MARINE CORPS.....
AIRCRAFT
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE
STRATEGIC
OFFENSIVE
1 B-21 RAIDER....... 0 108,027 0 108,027
TACTICAL FORCES
2 F-35.............. 48 4,167,604 1 260,000 49 4,427,604
Air Force UFR--F- [0] [175,000]
35 power modules.
Program increase.. [1] [85,000]
3 F-35.............. 0 352,632 0 352,632
5 F-15EX............ 12 1,186,903 5 576,000 17 1,762,903
Air Force UFR-- [5] [576,000]
Additional
aircraft, spares,
support equipment
6 F-15EX............ 0 147,919 0 147,919
TACTICAL AIRLIFT
7 KC-46A MDAP....... 14 2,380,315 14 2,380,315
OTHER AIRLIFT
8 C-130J............ 1 128,896 1 128,896
9 MC-130J........... 3 220,049 3 220,049
UPT TRAINERS
11 ADVANCED TRAINER 0 10,397 0 10,397
REPLACEMENT T-X..
HELICOPTERS
12 MH-139A........... 0 0 0 75,000 0 75,000
Program increase.. [0] [75,000]
13 COMBAT RESCUE 14 792,221 14 792,221
HELICOPTER.......
MISSION SUPPORT
AIRCRAFT
16 CIVIL AIR PATROL A/ 0 2,813 0 2,813
C................
OTHER AIRCRAFT
17 TARGET DRONES..... 22 116,169 22 116,169
19 E-11 BACN/HAG..... 2 124,435 2 124,435
21 MQ-9.............. 0 3,288 5 100,000 5 103,288
Additional [5] [100,000]
aircraft.........
STRATEGIC AIRCRAFT
23 B-2A.............. 0 29,944 0 29,944
24 B-1B.............. 0 30,518 0 30,518
25 B-52.............. 0 82,820 0 4,000 0 86,820
B-52 training [0] [4,000]
system...........
26 COMBAT RESCUE 0 61,191 0 61,191
HELICOPTER.......
27 LARGE AIRCRAFT 0 57,001 0 57,001
INFRARED
COUNTERMEASURES..
TACTICAL AIRCRAFT
28 A-10.............. 0 83,621 0 83,621
29 E-11 BACN/HAG..... 0 68,955 0 68,955
30 F-15.............. 0 234,340 0 234,340
31 F-16.............. 0 613,166 0 25,000 0 638,166
F-16 AESAs........ [0] [25,000]
32 F-22A............. 0 424,722 0 424,722
33 F-35 MODIFICATIONS 0 304,135 0 1,670,750 0 1,974,885
F-35 upgrades to [0] [1,670,750]
Block 4..........
34 F-15 EPAW......... 18 149,797 18 149,797
36 KC-46A MDAP....... 0 1,984 0 1,984
AIRLIFT AIRCRAFT
37 C-5............... 0 25,431 0 25,431
38 C-17A............. 0 59,570 0 59,570
40 C-32A............. 0 1,949 0 1,949
41 C-37A............. 0 5,984 0 5,984
TRAINER AIRCRAFT
42 GLIDER MODS....... 0 142 0 142
43 T-6............... 0 8,735 0 8,735
44 T-1............... 0 3,872 0 3,872
45 T-38.............. 0 49,851 0 49,851
OTHER AIRCRAFT
46 U-2 MODS.......... 0 126,809 0 126,809
47 KC-10A (ATCA)..... 0 1,902 0 1,902
49 VC-25A MOD........ 0 96 0 96
50 C-40.............. 0 262 0 262
51 C-130............. 0 29,071 0 29,071
52 C-130J MODS....... 0 110,784 0 110,784
53 C-135............. 0 61,376 0 61,376
54 COMPASS CALL...... 0 195,098 5 75,000 5 270,098
Air Force UFR-- [5] [75,000]
Additional spare
engines..........
56 RC-135............ 0 207,596 0 207,596
57 E-3............... 0 109,855 0 109,855
58 E-4............... 0 19,081 0 19,081
59 E-8............... 0 16,312 0 16,312
60 AIRBORNE WARNING 0 30,327 0 30,327
AND CNTRL SYS
(AWACS) 40/45....
62 H-1............... 0 1,533 0 1,533
63 H-60.............. 0 13,709 0 13,709
64 RQ-4 MODS......... 0 3,205 0 3,205
65 HC/MC-130 0 150,263 0 150,263
MODIFICATIONS....
66 OTHER AIRCRAFT.... 0 54,828 0 54,828
67 MQ-9 MODS......... 0 144,287 0 144,287
68 MQ-9 UAS PAYLOADS. 0 40,800 0 40,800
69 SENIOR LEADER C3, 0 23,554 0 23,554
SYSTEM--AIRCRAFT.
70 CV-22 MODS........ 0 158,162 0 82,400 0 240,562
SOCOM UFR--CV-22 [0] [82,400]
reliability
acceleration.....
AIRCRAFT SPARES
AND REPAIR PARTS
71 INITIAL SPARES/ 0 915,710 0 915,710
REPAIR PARTS.....
COMMON SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
72 AIRCRAFT 0 138,761 0 138,761
REPLACEMENT
SUPPORT EQUIP....
POST PRODUCTION
SUPPORT
73 B-2A.............. 0 1,651 0 1,651
74 B-2B.............. 0 38,811 0 38,811
75 B-52.............. 0 5,602 0 5,602
78 F-15.............. 0 2,324 0 2,324
79 F-16.............. 0 10,456 0 10,456
81 RQ-4 POST 0 24,592 0 24,592
PRODUCTION
CHARGES..........
INDUSTRIAL
PREPAREDNESS
82 INDUSTRIAL 0 18,110 0 18,110
RESPONSIVENESS...
WAR CONSUMABLES
83 WAR CONSUMABLES... 0 35,866 0 35,866
OTHER PRODUCTION
CHARGES
84 OTHER PRODUCTION 0 979,388 0 979,388
CHARGES..........
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 18,092 0 18,092
PROGRAMS.........
TOTAL AIRCRAFT 134 15,727,669 16 2,868,150 150 18,595,819
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE............
MISSILE
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE
MISSILE
REPLACEMENT
EQUIPMENT--BALLIS
TIC
1 MISSILE 0 57,793 0 57,793
REPLACEMENT EQ-
BALLISTIC........
BALLISTIC MISSILES
2 GROUND BASED 0 8,895 0 8,895
STRATEGIC
DETERRENT........
TACTICAL
3 REPLAC EQUIP & WAR 0 7,681 0 7,681
CONSUMABLES......
4 AGM-183A AIR- 0 160,850 0 160,850
LAUNCHED RAPID
RESPONSE WEAPON..
6 JOINT AIR-SURFACE 525 710,550 525 710,550
STANDOFF MISSILE.
8 SIDEWINDER (AIM- 243 107,587 243 107,587
9X)..............
9 AMRAAM............ 168 214,002 168 214,002
10 PREDATOR HELLFIRE 1,176 103,684 1,176 103,684
MISSILE..........
11 SMALL DIAMETER 998 82,819 998 82,819
BOMB.............
12 SMALL DIAMETER 985 294,649 985 294,649
BOMB II..........
INDUSTRIAL
FACILITIES
13 INDUSTR'L 0 757 0 757
PREPAREDNS/POL
PREVENTION.......
CLASS IV
15 ICBM FUZE MOD..... 40 53,013 0 12,250 40 65,263
Realignment of [0] [12,250]
funds............
16 ICBM FUZE MOD..... 0 47,757 0 -12,250 0 35,507
Realignment of [0] [-12,250]
funds............
17 MM III 0 88,579 0 88,579
MODIFICATIONS....
19 AIR LAUNCH CRUISE 0 46,799 0 46,799
MISSILE (ALCM)...
MISSILE SPARES AND
REPAIR PARTS
20 MSL SPRS/REPAIR 0 16,212 0 16,212
PARTS (INITIAL)..
21 MSL SPRS/REPAIR 0 63,547 0 63,547
PARTS (REPLEN)...
22 INITIAL SPARES/ 0 4,045 0 4,045
REPAIR PARTS.....
SPECIAL PROGRAMS
27 SPECIAL UPDATE 0 30,352 0 30,352
PROGRAMS.........
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 570,240 0 570,240
PROGRAMS.........
TOTAL MISSILE 4,135 2,669,811 0 0 4,135 2,669,811
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE............
PROCUREMENT, SPACE
FORCE
SPACE PROCUREMENT,
SF
2 AF SATELLITE COMM 0 43,655 0 43,655
SYSTEM...........
3 COUNTERSPACE 0 64,804 0 64,804
SYSTEMS..........
4 FAMILY OF BEYOND 0 39,444 0 39,444
LINE-OF-SIGHT
TERMINALS........
5 GENERAL 0 3,316 0 9,800 0 13,116
INFORMATION TECH--
SPACE............
Space Force UFR-- [0] [8,000]
Long duration
propulsive
national security
space launch
secondary payload
adapter..........
Space Force UFR-- [0] [1,800]
Modernize space
aggressor
equipment........
6 GPSIII FOLLOW ON.. 2 601,418 2 601,418
7 GPS III SPACE 0 84,452 0 84,452
SEGMENT..........
8 GLOBAL POSTIONING 0 2,274 0 2,274
(SPACE)..........
9 HERITAGE 0 13,529 0 13,529
TRANSITION.......
10 SPACEBORNE EQUIP 0 26,245 0 22,700 0 48,945
(COMSEC).........
Space Force UFR-- [0] [22,700]
Space-rated
crypto devices to
support launch...
11 MILSATCOM......... 0 24,333 0 24,333
12 SBIR HIGH (SPACE). 0 154,526 0 154,526
13 SPECIAL SPACE 0 142,188 0 142,188
ACTIVITIES.......
14 MOBILE USER 0 45,371 0 45,371
OBJECTIVE SYSTEM.
15 NATIONAL SECURITY 5 1,337,347 5 1,337,347
SPACE LAUNCH.....
16 NUDET DETECTION 0 6,690 0 6,690
SYSTEM...........
17 PTES HUB.......... 0 7,406 0 7,406
18 ROCKET SYSTEMS 0 10,429 0 10,429
LAUNCH PROGRAM...
20 SPACE MODS........ 0 64,371 0 64,371
21 SPACELIFT RANGE 0 93,774 0 93,774
SYSTEM SPACE.....
SPARES
22 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 1,282 0 1,282
PARTS............
TOTAL PROCUREMENT, 7 2,766,854 0 32,500 7 2,799,354
SPACE FORCE......
PROCUREMENT OF
AMMUNITION, AIR
FORCE
ROCKETS
1 ROCKETS........... 0 36,597 0 36,597
CARTRIDGES
2 CARTRIDGES........ 0 169,163 0 169,163
BOMBS
3 PRACTICE BOMBS.... 0 48,745 0 48,745
4 GENERAL PURPOSE 0 176,565 0 176,565
BOMBS............
5 MASSIVE ORDNANCE 0 15,500 0 15,500
PENETRATOR (MOP).
6 JOINT DIRECT 1,919 124,102 1,919 124,102
ATTACK MUNITION..
7 B-61.............. 0 2,709 0 2,709
OTHER ITEMS
8 CAD/PAD........... 0 47,210 0 47,210
9 EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE 0 6,151 0 6,151
DISPOSAL (EOD)...
10 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 535 0 535
PARTS............
11 MODIFICATIONS..... 0 292 0 292
12 ITEMS LESS THAN 0 9,164 0 9,164
$5,000,000.......
FLARES
13 FLARES............ 0 95,297 0 95,297
FUZES
14 FUZES............. 0 50,795 0 50,795
SMALL ARMS
15 SMALL ARMS........ 0 12,343 0 12,343
TOTAL PROCUREMENT 1,919 795,168 0 0 1,919 795,168
OF AMMUNITION,
AIR FORCE........
OTHER PROCUREMENT,
AIR FORCE
PASSENGER CARRYING
VEHICLES
1 PASSENGER CARRYING 0 8,448 0 8,448
VEHICLES.........
CARGO AND UTILITY
VEHICLES
2 MEDIUM TACTICAL 0 5,804 0 5,804
VEHICLE..........
3 CAP VEHICLES...... 0 1,066 0 1,066
4 CARGO AND UTILITY 0 57,459 0 4,500 0 61,959
VEHICLES.........
CNGB UFR--Security [0] [4,500]
forces utility
task vehicle.....
SPECIAL PURPOSE
VEHICLES
5 JOINT LIGHT 0 97,326 0 97,326
TACTICAL VEHICLE.
6 SECURITY AND 0 488 0 488
TACTICAL VEHICLES
7 SPECIAL PURPOSE 0 75,694 0 5,400 0 81,094
VEHICLES.........
CNGB UFR-- [0] [5,400]
Temperature
control trailers.
FIRE FIGHTING
EQUIPMENT
8 FIRE FIGHTING/ 0 12,525 0 12,525
CRASH RESCUE
VEHICLES.........
MATERIALS HANDLING
EQUIPMENT
9 MATERIALS HANDLING 0 34,933 0 34,933
VEHICLES.........
BASE MAINTENANCE
SUPPORT
10 RUNWAY SNOW REMOV 0 9,134 0 9,134
AND CLEANING EQU.
11 BASE MAINTENANCE 0 111,820 0 111,820
SUPPORT VEHICLES.
COMM SECURITY
EQUIPMENT(COMSEC)
13 COMSEC EQUIPMENT.. 0 66,022 0 66,022
14 STRATEGIC 0 885,051 0 885,051
MICROELECTRONIC
SUPPLY SYSTEM....
INTELLIGENCE
PROGRAMS
15 INTERNATIONAL 0 5,809 0 5,809
INTEL TECH &
ARCHITECTURES....
16 INTELLIGENCE 0 5,719 0 5,719
TRAINING
EQUIPMENT........
17 INTELLIGENCE COMM 0 25,844 0 25,844
EQUIPMENT........
ELECTRONICS
PROGRAMS
18 AIR TRAFFIC 0 44,516 0 8,000 0 52,516
CONTROL & LANDING
SYS..............
Air Force UFR-- [0] [8,000]
Build command and
control framework
19 BATTLE CONTROL 0 2,940 0 2,940
SYSTEM--FIXED....
20 THEATER AIR 0 43,442 0 4,400 0 47,842
CONTROL SYS
IMPROVEMEN.......
EUCOM UFR--Air [0] [4,400]
base air defens
ops center.......
21 3D EXPEDITIONARY 0 96,186 0 152,000 0 248,186
LONG-RANGE RADAR.
Air Force UFR-- [0] [152,000]
Build command and
control framework
22 WEATHER 0 32,376 0 600 0 32,976
OBSERVATION
FORECAST.........
Space Force UFR-- [0] [600]
Thule Air Base
wind profiler....
23 STRATEGIC COMMAND 0 37,950 0 37,950
AND CONTROL......
24 CHEYENNE MOUNTAIN 0 8,258 0 8,258
COMPLEX..........
25 MISSION PLANNING 0 14,717 0 14,717
SYSTEMS..........
SPCL COMM-
ELECTRONICS
PROJECTS
27 GENERAL 0 43,917 0 44,330 0 88,247
INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY.......
EUCOM UFR--Mission [0] [13,800]
Partner
Environment......
INDOPACOM UFR-- [0] [30,530]
Mission Partner
Environment......
28 AF GLOBAL COMMAND 0 414 0 414
& CONTROL SYS....
30 MOBILITY COMMAND 0 10,619 0 10,619
AND CONTROL......
31 AIR FORCE PHYSICAL 0 101,896 0 14,901 0 116,797
SECURITY SYSTEM..
EUCOM UFR--Counter- [0] [1,241]
UAS for UASFE
installations....
EUCOM UFR--Sensors [0] [11,660]
for air base air
defense..........
Space Force UFR-- [0] [2,000]
Maui Optical Site
security system..
32 COMBAT TRAINING 0 222,598 0 222,598
RANGES...........
33 COMBAT TRAINING 0 14,730 0 14,730
RANGES...........
34 MINIMUM ESSENTIAL 0 77,119 0 77,119
EMERGENCY COMM N.
35 WIDE AREA 0 38,794 0 38,794
SURVEILLANCE
(WAS)............
36 C3 COUNTERMEASURES 0 131,238 0 131,238
37 INTEGRATED 0 15,240 0 15,240
PERSONNEL AND PAY
SYSTEM...........
38 GCSS-AF FOS....... 0 3,959 0 3,959
40 MAINTENANCE REPAIR 0 4,387 0 4,387
& OVERHAUL
INITIATIVE.......
41 THEATER BATTLE MGT 0 4,052 0 4,052
C2 SYSTEM........
42 AIR & SPACE 0 2,224 0 2,224
OPERATIONS CENTER
(AOC)............
AIR FORCE
COMMUNICATIONS
43 BASE INFORMATION 0 58,499 0 58,499
TRANSPT INFRAST
(BITI) WIRED.....
44 AFNET............. 0 65,354 0 65,354
45 JOINT 0 4,377 0 4,377
COMMUNICATIONS
SUPPORT ELEMENT
(JCSE)...........
46 USCENTCOM......... 0 18,101 0 18,101
47 USSTRATCOM........ 0 4,226 0 4,226
ORGANIZATION AND
BASE
48 TACTICAL C-E 0 162,955 0 162,955
EQUIPMENT........
49 RADIO EQUIPMENT... 0 14,232 0 1,500 0 15,732
Space Force UFR-- [0] [1,500]
radio equipment..
51 BASE COMM 0 200,797 0 63,500 0 264,297
INFRASTRUCTURE...
EUCOM UFR-- [0] [55,000]
Modernize IT
infrastructure...
Space Force UFR-- [0] [1,200]
Emergency 911
rech refresh.....
Space Force UFR-- [0] [7,000]
Lifecycle SIPR/
NIP replacement..
Space Force UFR-- [0] [300]
Maui Optical Site
resilient comms..
MODIFICATIONS
52 COMM ELECT MODS... 0 18,607 0 18,607
PERSONAL SAFETY &
RESCUE EQUIP
53 PERSONAL SAFETY 0 106,449 0 25,000 0 131,449
AND RESCUE
EQUIPMENT........
CNGB UFR--Critical [0] [9,500]
care air
transport team...
CNGB UFR--Tactical [0] [15,500]
combat casualty
care medical kit.
DEPOT PLANT+MTRLS
HANDLING EQ
54 POWER CONDITIONING 0 11,274 0 11,274
EQUIPMENT........
55 MECHANIZED 0 8,594 0 8,594
MATERIAL HANDLING
EQUIP............
BASE SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT
56 BASE PROCURED 0 1 0 83,250 0 83,251
EQUIPMENT........
CNGB UFR--Modular [0] [75,000]
small arms ranges
EUCOM UFR-- [0] [8,250]
Tactical decoy
devices..........
57 ENGINEERING AND 0 32,139 0 32,139
EOD EQUIPMENT....
58 MOBILITY EQUIPMENT 0 63,814 0 67,200 0 131,014
CNGB UFR-- [0] [3,200]
Aeromedical
evacuation
equipment kit....
CNGB UFR--Disaster [0] [22,500]
relief mobile
kitchen trailers.
CNGB UFR--Oxygen [0] [3,000]
generation system
CNGB UFR--Rapid [0] [7,500]
response shelters
CNGB UFR--Security [0] [31,000]
forces modular
ballistic
protection system
59 FUELS SUPPORT 0 17,928 0 17,928
EQUIPMENT (FSE)..
60 BASE MAINTENANCE 0 48,534 0 48,534
AND SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT........
SPECIAL SUPPORT
PROJECTS
62 DARP RC135........ 0 27,359 0 27,359
63 DCGS-AF........... 0 261,070 0 261,070
65 SPECIAL UPDATE 0 777,652 0 777,652
PROGRAM..........
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 20,983,908 0 20,983,908
PROGRAMS.........
SPARES AND REPAIR
PARTS
66 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 978 0 978
PARTS (CYBER)....
67 SPARES AND REPAIR 0 9,575 0 1,000 0 10,575
PARTS............
Air Force UFR-- [0] [1,000]
Build command and
control framework
TOTAL OTHER 0 25,251,137 0 475,581 0 25,726,718
PROCUREMENT, AIR
FORCE............
PROCUREMENT,
DEFENSE-WIDE
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DCSA
2 MAJOR EQUIPMENT... 0 3,014 0 3,014
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DHRA
4 PERSONNEL 0 4,042 0 4,042
ADMINISTRATION...
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DISA
10 INFORMATION 0 18,923 0 18,923
SYSTEMS SECURITY.
11 TELEPORT PROGRAM.. 0 34,908 0 34,908
12 JOINT FORCES 0 1,968 0 1,968
HEADQUARTERS--DOD
IN...............
13 ITEMS LESS THAN $5 0 42,270 0 42,270
MILLION..........
14 DEFENSE 0 18,025 0 18,025
INFORMATION
SYSTEM NETWORK...
15 WHITE HOUSE 0 44,522 0 44,522
COMMUNICATION
AGENCY...........
16 SENIOR LEADERSHIP 0 54,592 0 54,592
ENTERPRISE.......
17 JOINT REGIONAL 0 62,657 0 62,657
SECURITY STACKS
(JRSS)...........
18 JOINT SERVICE 0 102,039 0 102,039
PROVIDER.........
19 FOURTH ESTATE 0 80,645 0 80,645
NETWORK
OPTIMIZATION
(4ENO)...........
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DLA
21 MAJOR EQUIPMENT... 0 530,896 0 530,896
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DMACT
22 MAJOR EQUIPMENT... 0 8,498 0 8,498
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DODEA
23 AUTOMATION/ 0 2,963 0 2,963
EDUCATIONAL
SUPPORT &
LOGISTICS........
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DPAA
24 MAJOR EQUIPMENT, 10 494 10 494
DPAA.............
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
DEFENSE THREAT
REDUCTION AGENCY
26 VEHICLES.......... 0 118 0 118
27 OTHER MAJOR 0 12,681 0 12,681
EQUIPMENT........
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
MISSILE DEFENSE
AGENCY
29 THAAD............. 18 251,543 12 109,579 30 361,122
MDA UFR-- [12] [109,579]
Additional
interceptors.....
31 AEGIS BMD......... 40 334,621 40 334,621
32 AEGIS BMD......... 0 17,493 0 17,493
33 BMDS AN/TPY-2 0 2,738 0 2,738
RADARS...........
34 SM-3 IIAS......... 8 295,322 2 41,000 10 336,322
MDA UFR-- [2] [41,000]
Additional AURs..
35 ARROW 3 UPPER TIER 1 62,000 1 62,000
SYSTEMS..........
36 SHORT RANGE 1 30,000 1 30,000
BALLISTIC MISSILE
DEFENSE (SRBMD)..
37 DEFENSE OF GUAM 0 40,000 0 77,220 0 117,220
PROCUREMENT......
INDOPACOM UFR-- [0] [77,220]
Guam Defense
System...........
38 AEGIS ASHORE PHASE 0 25,866 0 25,866
III..............
39 IRON DOME......... 1 108,000 1 108,000
40 AEGIS BMD HARDWARE 14 81,791 14 81,791
AND SOFTWARE.....
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
NSA
46 INFORMATION 0 315 0 315
SYSTEMS SECURITY
PROGRAM (ISSP)...
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
OSD
47 MAJOR EQUIPMENT, 0 31,420 0 31,420
OSD..............
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
SDA
48 JOINT CAPABILITY 0 74,060 0 74,060
TECH
DEMONSTRATION
(JCTD)...........
MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
TJS
49 MAJOR EQUIPMENT, 0 7,830 0 7,830
TJS..............
CLASSIFIED
PROGRAMS
9999 CLASSIFIED 0 635,338 0 635,338
PROGRAMS.........
AVIATION PROGRAMS
52 ARMED OVERWATCH/ 6 170,000 6 170,000
TARGETING........
53 MANNED ISR........ 0 2,500 0 2,500
54 MC-12............. 0 2,250 0 2,250
55 MH-60 BLACKHAWK... 0 29,900 0 29,900
56 ROTARY WING 0 202,278 0 202,278
UPGRADES AND
SUSTAINMENT......
57 UNMANNED ISR...... 0 55,951 0 55,951
58 NON-STANDARD 0 3,282 0 3,282
AVIATION.........
59 U-28.............. 0 4,176 0 4,176
60 MH-47 CHINOOK..... 0 130,485 0 130,485
61 CV-22 MODIFICATION 0 41,762 0 5,810 0 47,572
SOCOM UFR--CV-22 [0] [5,810]
reliability
acceleration.....
62 MQ-9 UNMANNED 0 8,020 0 8,020
AERIAL VEHICLE...
63 PRECISION STRIKE 0 165,224 0 165,224
PACKAGE..........
64 AC/MC-130J........ 0 205,216 0 205,216
65 C-130 0 13,373 0 13,373
MODIFICATIONS....
SHIPBUILDING
66 UNDERWATER SYSTEMS 0 17,227 0 6,100 0 23,327
SOCOM UFR--Combat [0] [5,200]
diving advanced
equipment
acceleration.....
SOCOM UFR-- [0] [900]
Modernized
forward look
sonar............
AMMUNITION
PROGRAMS
67 ORDNANCE ITEMS 0 168,072 0 168,072
<$5M.............
OTHER PROCUREMENT
PROGRAMS
68 INTELLIGENCE 0 131,889 0 131,889
SYSTEMS..........
69 DISTRIBUTED COMMON 0 5,991 0 5,991
GROUND/SURFACE
SYSTEMS..........
70 OTHER ITEMS <$5M.. 0 62,722 0 62,722
71 COMBATANT CRAFT 0 17,080 0 17,080
SYSTEMS..........
72 SPECIAL PROGRAMS.. 0 44,351 0 31,180 0 75,531
SOCOM UFR--Medium [0] [31,180]
fixed wing
mobility
modifications....
73 TACTICAL VEHICLES. 0 26,806 0 26,806
74 WARRIOR SYSTEMS 0 284,548 0 284,548
<$5M.............
75 COMBAT MISSION 0 27,513 0 27,513
REQUIREMENTS.....
77 OPERATIONAL 0 20,252 0 20,252
ENHANCEMENTS
INTELLIGENCE.....
78 OPERATIONAL 0 328,569 0 61,303 0 389,872
ENHANCEMENTS.....
SOCOM UFR--Armored [0] [33,303]
ground mobility
systems
acceleration.....
SOCOM UFR--Fused [0] [28,000]
panoramic night
vision goggles
acceleration.....
CBDP
79 CHEMICAL 0 167,918 0 167,918
BIOLOGICAL
SITUATIONAL
AWARENESS........
80 CB PROTECTION & 0 189,265 0 189,265
HAZARD MITIGATION
TOTAL PROCUREMENT, 99 5,548,212 14 332,192 113 5,880,404
DEFENSE-WIDE.....
TOTAL PROCUREMENT. 26,050 132,205,078 75,704 11,849,451 101,754 144,054,529
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLII--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
TITLE XLII--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND
EVALUATION
SEC. 4201. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4201. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate
Line Program Element Item FY 2022 Request Senate Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
..................... RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST & EVAL, ARMY
..................... BASIC RESEARCH
1 0601102A DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES 297,241 297,241
2 0601103A UNIVERSITY RESEARCH 66,981 36,500 103,481
INITIATIVES.
..................... Smart thread data [5,000]
exchange.
..................... UAS propulsion research.. [1,500]
..................... University research [30,000]
programs.
3 0601104A UNIVERSITY AND INDUSTRY 94,003 94,003
RESEARCH CENTERS.
4 0601121A CYBER COLLABORATIVE 5,067 5,067
RESEARCH ALLIANCE.
5 0601601A ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE 10,183 10,183
AND MACHINE LEARNING
BASIC RESEARCH.
..................... SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH.. 473,475 36,500 509,975
.....................
..................... APPLIED RESEARCH
6 0602115A BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY.... 11,925 11,925
7 0602134A COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT 1,976 1,976
ADVANCED STUDIES.
8 0602141A LETHALITY TECHNOLOGY..... 64,126 2,500 66,626
..................... Ceramic material systems [2,500]
for extreme environments.
9 0602142A ARMY APPLIED RESEARCH.... 28,654 28,654
10 0602143A SOLDIER LETHALITY 105,168 105,168
TECHNOLOGY.
11 0602144A GROUND TECHNOLOGY........ 56,400 11,000 67,400
..................... Earthen structures [3,000]
research.
..................... Graphene applications for [2,000]
military engineering.
..................... Polar research and [4,000]
testing.
..................... Verified inherent control [2,000]
12 0602145A NEXT GENERATION COMBAT 172,166 2,500 174,666
VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Light detection and [2,500]
ranging (LiDAR)
technology.
13 0602146A NETWORK C3I TECHNOLOGY... 84,606 2,000 86,606
..................... UAS sensor research...... [2,000]
14 0602147A LONG RANGE PRECISION 64,285 64,285
FIRES TECHNOLOGY.
15 0602148A FUTURE VERTICLE LIFT 91,411 91,411
TECHNOLOGY.
16 0602150A AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE 19,316 28,000 47,316
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Counter-UAS applied [5,000]
research.
..................... High energy laser [5,000]
research.
..................... High energy laser support [5,000]
technology.
..................... Kill chain automation for [8,000]
air and missile defense
systems.
..................... Secure computing [5,000]
capabilities.
17 0602180A ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE 15,034 15,034
AND MACHINE LEARNING
TECHNOLOGIES.
18 0602181A ALL DOMAIN CONVERGENCE 25,967 25,967
APPLIED RESEARCH.
19 0602182A C3I APPLIED RESEARCH..... 12,406 12,406
20 0602183A AIR PLATFORM APPLIED 6,597 6,597
RESEARCH.
21 0602184A SOLDIER APPLIED RESEARCH. 11,064 7,500 18,564
..................... Military footwear [2,500]
research.
..................... Pathfinder air assault... [5,000]
22 0602213A C3I APPLIED CYBER........ 12,123 12,123
23 0602386A BIOTECHNOLOGY FOR 20,643 20,643
MATERIALS--APPLIED
RESEARCH.
24 0602785A MANPOWER/PERSONNEL/ 18,701 18,701
TRAINING TECHNOLOGY.
25 0602787A MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY....... 91,720 91,720
..................... SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH 914,288 53,500 967,788
.....................
..................... ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT
26 0603002A MEDICAL ADVANCED 43,804 43,804
TECHNOLOGY.
27 0603007A MANPOWER, PERSONNEL AND 14,273 14,273
TRAINING ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY.
28 0603025A ARMY AGILE INNOVATION AND 22,231 22,231
DEMONSTRATION.
29 0603040A ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE 909 909
AND MACHINE LEARNING
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES.
30 0603041A ALL DOMAIN CONVERGENCE 17,743 17,743
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
31 0603042A C3I ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.. 3,151 3,151
32 0603043A AIR PLATFORM ADVANCED 754 754
TECHNOLOGY.
33 0603044A SOLDIER ADVANCED 890 890
TECHNOLOGY.
34 0603115A MEDICAL DEVELOPMENT...... 26,521 26,521
35 0603116A LETHALITY ADVANCED 8,066 8,066
TECHNOLOGY.
36 0603117A ARMY ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 76,815 76,815
DEVELOPMENT.
37 0603118A SOLDIER LETHALITY 107,966 107,966
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
38 0603119A GROUND ADVANCED 23,403 18,000 41,403
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Additive manufacturing [15,000]
capabilities for austere
operating environments.
..................... Permafrost research...... [3,000]
39 0603134A COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT 24,747 24,747
SIMULATION.
40 0603386A BIOTECHNOLOGY FOR 53,736 53,736
MATERIALS--ADVANCED
RESEARCH.
41 0603457A C3I CYBER ADVANCED 31,426 31,426
DEVELOPMENT.
42 0603461A HIGH PERFORMANCE 189,123 5,000 194,123
COMPUTING MODERNIZATION
PROGRAM.
..................... High performance [5,000]
computing modernization
program.
43 0603462A NEXT GENERATION COMBAT 164,951 10,000 174,951
VEHICLE ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Combat vehicle lithium [1,500]
battery development.
..................... Cyber and connected [3,500]
vehicle integration
research.
..................... Robotics development..... [5,000]
44 0603463A NETWORK C3I ADVANCED 155,867 -13,000 142,867
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Command post [2,000]
modernization.
..................... Network technology [-15,000]
research.
45 0603464A LONG RANGE PRECISION 93,909 5,000 98,909
FIRES ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Advanced guidance [5,000]
technology.
46 0603465A FUTURE VERTICAL LIFT 179,677 8,500 188,177
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Future Long Range Assault [3,500]
Aircraft.
..................... Future vertical lift 20mm [5,000]
chain gun.
47 0603466A AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE 48,826 48,826
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
48 0603920A HUMANITARIAN DEMINING.... 8,649 8,649
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 1,297,437 33,500 1,330,937
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
49 0603305A ARMY MISSILE DEFENSE 11,702 11,702
SYSTEMS INTEGRATION.
50 0603308A ARMY SPACE SYSTEMS 18,755 18,755
INTEGRATION.
52 0603619A LANDMINE WARFARE AND 50,314 50,314
BARRIER--ADV DEV.
53 0603639A TANK AND MEDIUM CALIBER 79,873 79,873
AMMUNITION.
54 0603645A ARMORED SYSTEM 170,590 170,590
MODERNIZATION--ADV DEV.
55 0603747A SOLDIER SUPPORT AND 2,897 2,897
SURVIVABILITY.
56 0603766A TACTICAL ELECTRONIC 113,365 113,365
SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM--ADV
DEV.
57 0603774A NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS 18,000 3,804 21,804
ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Army UFR--Soldier [3,804]
Maneuver Sensors.
58 0603779A ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 11,921 11,921
TECHNOLOGY--DEM/VAL.
59 0603790A NATO RESEARCH AND 3,777 3,777
DEVELOPMENT.
60 0603801A AVIATION--ADV DEV........ 1,125,641 1,125,641
61 0603804A LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER 7,055 7,055
EQUIPMENT--ADV DEV.
62 0603807A MEDICAL SYSTEMS--ADV DEV. 22,071 22,071
63 0603827A SOLDIER SYSTEMS--ADVANCED 17,459 2,900 20,359
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Development of [2,900]
anthropomorphic armor
for female
servicemembers.
64 0604017A ROBOTICS DEVELOPMENT..... 87,198 87,198
65 0604019A EXPANDED MISSION AREA 50,674 50,674
MISSILE (EMAM).
67 0604035A LOW EARTH ORBIT (LEO) 19,638 19,638
SATELLITE CAPABILITY.
68 0604036A MULTI-DOMAIN SENSING 50,548 50,548
SYSTEM (MDSS) ADV DEV.
69 0604037A TACTICAL INTEL TARGETING 28,347 28,347
ACCESS NODE (TITAN) ADV
DEV.
70 0604100A ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES. 10,091 10,091
71 0604101A SMALL UNMANNED AERIAL 926 926
VEHICLE (SUAV) (6.4).
72 0604113A FUTURE TACTICAL UNMANNED 69,697 6,000 75,697
AIRCRAFT SYSTEM (FTUAS).
..................... Army UFR--Acceleration of [6,000]
FTUAS.
73 0604114A LOWER TIER AIR MISSILE 327,690 327,690
DEFENSE (LTAMD) SENSOR.
74 0604115A TECHNOLOGY MATURATION 270,124 270,124
INITIATIVES.
75 0604117A MANEUVER--SHORT RANGE AIR 39,376 39,376
DEFENSE (M-SHORAD).
76 0604119A ARMY ADVANCED COMPONENT 189,483 189,483
DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPING.
77 0604120A ASSURED POSITIONING, 96,679 96,679
NAVIGATION AND TIMING
(PNT).
78 0604121A SYNTHETIC TRAINING 194,195 4,600 198,795
ENVIRONMENT REFINEMENT &
PROTOTYPING.
..................... Synthetic training [4,600]
enviroment.
79 0604134A COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT 13,379 13,379
DEMONSTRATION, PROTOTYPE
DEVELOPMENT, AND TESTING.
80 0604182A HYPERSONICS.............. 300,928 300,928
81 0604403A FUTURE INTERCEPTOR....... 7,895 7,895
82 0604531A COUNTER--SMALL UNMANNED 19,148 19,148
AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS
ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT.
83 0604541A UNIFIED NETWORK TRANSPORT 35,409 35,409
84 0604644A MOBILE MEDIUM RANGE 286,457 286,457
MISSILE.
85 0604785A INTEGRATED BASE DEFENSE 2,040 2,040
(BUDGET ACTIVITY 4).
86 0305251A CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS 52,988 52,988
FORCES AND FORCE SUPPORT.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 3,806,330 17,304 3,823,634
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPES.
.....................
..................... SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION
89 0604201A AIRCRAFT AVIONICS........ 6,654 6,654
90 0604270A ELECTRONIC WARFARE 30,840 30,840
DEVELOPMENT.
91 0604601A INFANTRY SUPPORT WEAPONS. 67,873 67,873
92 0604604A MEDIUM TACTICAL VEHICLES. 11,374 11,374
93 0604611A JAVELIN.................. 7,094 7,094
94 0604622A FAMILY OF HEAVY TACTICAL 31,602 31,602
VEHICLES.
95 0604633A AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL...... 4,405 4,405
96 0604642A LIGHT TACTICAL WHEELED 2,055 5,600 7,655
VEHICLES.
..................... Army UFR--Electric light [5,600]
reconnaissance vehicle.
97 0604645A ARMORED SYSTEMS 137,256 137,256
MODERNIZATION (ASM)--ENG
DEV.
98 0604710A NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS--ENG 62,690 62,690
DEV.
99 0604713A COMBAT FEEDING, CLOTHING, 1,658 1,658
AND EQUIPMENT.
100 0604715A NON-SYSTEM TRAINING 26,540 26,540
DEVICES--ENG DEV.
101 0604741A AIR DEFENSE COMMAND, 59,518 59,518
CONTROL AND
INTELLIGENCE--ENG DEV.
102 0604742A CONSTRUCTIVE SIMULATION 22,331 22,331
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
103 0604746A AUTOMATIC TEST EQUIPMENT 8,807 8,807
DEVELOPMENT.
104 0604760A DISTRIBUTIVE INTERACTIVE 7,453 7,453
SIMULATIONS (DIS)--ENG
DEV.
107 0604798A BRIGADE ANALYSIS, 21,534 21,534
INTEGRATION AND
EVALUATION.
108 0604802A WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS-- 309,778 309,778
ENG DEV.
109 0604804A LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER 59,261 59,261
EQUIPMENT--ENG DEV.
110 0604805A COMMAND, CONTROL, 20,121 20,121
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS--
ENG DEV.
111 0604807A MEDICAL MATERIEL/MEDICAL 44,424 44,424
BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE
EQUIPMENT--ENG DEV.
112 0604808A LANDMINE WARFARE/BARRIER-- 14,137 14,137
ENG DEV.
113 0604818A ARMY TACTICAL COMMAND & 162,704 162,704
CONTROL HARDWARE &
SOFTWARE.
114 0604820A RADAR DEVELOPMENT........ 127,919 127,919
115 0604822A GENERAL FUND ENTERPRISE 17,623 17,623
BUSINESS SYSTEM (GFEBS).
117 0604827A SOLDIER SYSTEMS--WARRIOR 6,454 6,454
DEM/VAL.
118 0604852A SUITE OF SURVIVABILITY 106,354 21,000 127,354
ENHANCEMENT SYSTEMS--EMD.
..................... Army UFR--Active [21,000]
protection systems for
Bradley and Stryker.
120 0605013A INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 122,168 122,168
DEVELOPMENT.
121 0605018A INTEGRATED PERSONNEL AND 76,936 76,936
PAY SYSTEM-ARMY (IPPS-A).
122 0605028A ARMORED MULTI-PURPOSE 35,560 35,560
VEHICLE (AMPV).
124 0605030A JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK 16,364 16,364
CENTER (JTNC).
125 0605031A JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK 28,954 28,954
(JTN).
128 0605035A COMMON INFRARED 16,630 16,630
COUNTERMEASURES (CIRCM).
130 0605038A NUCLEAR BIOLOGICAL 7,618 7,618
CHEMICAL RECONNAISSANCE
VEHICLE (NBCRV) SENSOR
SUITE.
131 0605041A DEFENSIVE CYBER TOOL 18,892 -5,000 13,892
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Cyber situational [-5,000]
understanding reduction.
132 0605042A TACTICAL NETWORK RADIO 28,849 28,849
SYSTEMS (LOW-TIER).
133 0605047A CONTRACT WRITING SYSTEM.. 22,960 -10,000 12,960
..................... Program reduction........ [-10,000]
135 0605051A AIRCRAFT SURVIVABILITY 65,603 65,603
DEVELOPMENT.
136 0605052A INDIRECT FIRE PROTECTION 233,512 233,512
CAPABILITY INC 2--BLOCK
1.
137 0605053A GROUND ROBOTICS.......... 18,241 18,241
138 0605054A EMERGING TECHNOLOGY 254,945 254,945
INITIATIVES.
139 0605143A BIOMETRICS ENABLING 4,326 4,326
CAPABILITY (BEC).
140 0605144A NEXT GENERATION LOAD 15,616 15,616
DEVICE--MEDIUM.
141 0605145A MEDICAL PRODUCTS AND 962 962
SUPPORT SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT.
142 0605148A TACTICAL INTEL TARGETING 54,972 54,972
ACCESS NODE (TITAN) EMD.
143 0605203A ARMY SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT & 122,175 122,175
DEMONSTRATION.
144 0605205A SMALL UNMANNED AERIAL 2,275 2,275
VEHICLE (SUAV) (6.5).
145 0605224A MULTI-DOMAIN INTELLIGENCE 9,313 9,313
146 0605225A SIO CAPABILITY 22,713 22,713
DEVELOPMENT.
147 0605231A PRECISION STRIKE MISSILE 188,452 188,452
(PRSM).
148 0605232A HYPERSONICS EMD.......... 111,473 111,473
149 0605233A ACCESSIONS INFORMATION 18,790 18,790
ENVIRONMENT (AIE).
150 0605450A JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND 2,134 2,134
MISSILE (JAGM).
151 0605457A ARMY INTEGRATED AIR AND 157,873 157,873
MISSILE DEFENSE (AIAMD).
152 0605531A COUNTER--SMALL UNMANNED 33,386 33,386
AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS SYS DEV
& DEMONSTRATION.
153 0605625A MANNED GROUND VEHICLE.... 225,106 225,106
154 0605766A NATIONAL CAPABILITIES 14,454 14,454
INTEGRATION (MIP).
155 0605812A JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL 2,564 2,564
VEHICLE (JLTV)
ENGINEERING AND
MANUFACTURING
DEVELOPMENT PH.
156 0605830A AVIATION GROUND SUPPORT 1,201 1,201
EQUIPMENT.
157 0303032A TROJAN--RH12............. 3,362 3,362
161 0304270A ELECTRONIC WARFARE 75,520 16,840 92,360
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Army UFR--Terrestrial [16,840]
Layer System (TLS)
Echelon Above Brigade
(EAB).
..................... SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 3,392,358 28,440 3,420,798
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
.....................
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
162 0604256A THREAT SIMULATOR 18,439 18,439
DEVELOPMENT.
163 0604258A TARGET SYSTEMS 17,404 17,404
DEVELOPMENT.
164 0604759A MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT..... 68,139 68,139
165 0605103A RAND ARROYO CENTER....... 33,126 33,126
166 0605301A ARMY KWAJALEIN ATOLL..... 240,877 27,000 267,877
..................... Army UFR--Preserve [27,000]
Kwajalein Atoll quality
of life.
167 0605326A CONCEPTS EXPERIMENTATION 79,710 79,710
PROGRAM.
169 0605601A ARMY TEST RANGES AND 354,227 354,227
FACILITIES.
170 0605602A ARMY TECHNICAL TEST 49,253 49,253
INSTRUMENTATION AND
TARGETS.
171 0605604A SURVIVABILITY/LETHALITY 36,389 36,389
ANALYSIS.
172 0605606A AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION... 2,489 2,489
173 0605702A METEOROLOGICAL SUPPORT TO 6,689 6,689
RDT&E ACTIVITIES.
174 0605706A MATERIEL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS 21,558 21,558
175 0605709A EXPLOITATION OF FOREIGN 13,631 13,631
ITEMS.
176 0605712A SUPPORT OF OPERATIONAL 55,122 55,122
TESTING.
177 0605716A ARMY EVALUATION CENTER... 65,854 65,854
178 0605718A ARMY MODELING & SIM X-CMD 2,633 2,633
COLLABORATION & INTEG.
179 0605801A PROGRAMWIDE ACTIVITIES... 96,589 96,589
180 0605803A TECHNICAL INFORMATION 26,808 26,808
ACTIVITIES.
181 0605805A MUNITIONS 43,042 43,042
STANDARDIZATION,
EFFECTIVENESS AND SAFETY.
182 0605857A ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 1,789 1,789
TECHNOLOGY MGMT SUPPORT.
183 0605898A ARMY DIRECT REPORT 52,108 52,108
HEADQUARTERS--R&D - MHA.
185 0606002A RONALD REAGAN BALLISTIC 80,952 80,952
MISSILE DEFENSE TEST
SITE.
186 0606003A COUNTERINTEL AND HUMAN 5,363 5,363
INTEL MODERNIZATION.
187 0606105A MEDICAL PROGRAM-WIDE 39,041 39,041
ACTIVITIES.
188 0606942A ASSESSMENTS AND 5,466 5,466
EVALUATIONS CYBER
VULNERABILITIES.
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 1,416,698 27,000 1,443,698
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT
190 0603778A MLRS PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT 12,314 12,314
PROGRAM.
191 0605024A ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY 8,868 8,868
SUPPORT.
192 0607131A WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS 22,828 22,828
PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAMS.
194 0607136A BLACKHAWK PRODUCT 4,773 4,773
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
195 0607137A CHINOOK PRODUCT 52,372 18,000 70,372
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
..................... CH-47 Chinook cargo on/ [8,000]
off loading system.
..................... Program increase......... [10,000]
196 0607139A IMPROVED TURBINE ENGINE 275,024 275,024
PROGRAM.
197 0607142A AVIATION ROCKET SYSTEM 12,417 12,417
PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT AND
DEVELOPMENT.
198 0607143A UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM 4,594 4,594
UNIVERSAL PRODUCTS.
199 0607145A APACHE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT 10,067 15,000 25,067
..................... Program increase......... [15,000]
200 0607148A AN/TPQ-53 COUNTERFIRE 56,681 56,681
TARGET ACQUISITION RADAR
SYSTEM.
201 0607150A INTEL CYBER DEVELOPMENT.. 3,611 8,860 12,471
..................... Army UFR--Cyber-Info [8,860]
Dominance Center.
202 0607312A ARMY OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS 28,029 28,029
DEVELOPMENT.
203 0607313A ELECTRONIC WARFARE 5,673 5,673
DEVELOPMENT.
204 0607665A FAMILY OF BIOMETRICS..... 1,178 1,178
205 0607865A PATRIOT PRODUCT 125,932 125,932
IMPROVEMENT.
206 0203728A JOINT AUTOMATED DEEP 25,547 25,547
OPERATION COORDINATION
SYSTEM (JADOCS).
207 0203735A COMBAT VEHICLE 211,523 64,100 275,623
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS.
..................... Abrams tank modernization [64,100]
208 0203743A 155MM SELF-PROPELLED 213,281 213,281
HOWITZER IMPROVEMENTS.
210 0203752A AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT 132 132
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
211 0203758A DIGITIZATION............. 3,936 3,936
212 0203801A MISSILE/AIR DEFENSE 127 127
PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM.
213 0203802A OTHER MISSILE PRODUCT 10,265 10,265
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS.
214 0205412A ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 262 262
TECHNOLOGY--OPERATIONAL
SYSTEM DEV.
215 0205456A LOWER TIER AIR AND 182 182
MISSILE DEFENSE (AMD)
SYSTEM.
216 0205778A GUIDED MULTIPLE-LAUNCH 63,937 63,937
ROCKET SYSTEM (GMLRS).
217 0208053A JOINT TACTICAL GROUND 13,379 13,379
SYSTEM.
219 0303028A SECURITY AND INTELLIGENCE 24,531 24,531
ACTIVITIES.
220 0303140A INFORMATION SYSTEMS 15,720 -5,000 10,720
SECURITY PROGRAM.
..................... Identity, credentialing, [-5,000]
and access management
reduction.
221 0303141A GLOBAL COMBAT SUPPORT 52,739 9,000 61,739
SYSTEM.
..................... Army UFR--ERP convergence/ [9,000]
modernization.
222 0303142A SATCOM GROUND ENVIRONMENT 15,247 15,247
(SPACE).
226 0305179A INTEGRATED BROADCAST 5,430 5,430
SERVICE (IBS).
227 0305204A TACTICAL UNMANNED AERIAL 8,410 8,410
VEHICLES.
228 0305206A AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE 24,460 24,460
SYSTEMS.
233 0307665A BIOMETRICS ENABLED 2,066 2,066
INTELLIGENCE.
234 0708045A END ITEM INDUSTRIAL 61,720 61,720
PREPAREDNESS ACTIVITIES.
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 2,993 2,993
..................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 1,380,248 109,960 1,490,208
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL
TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS
237 0608041A DEFENSIVE CYBER--SOFTWARE 118,811 118,811
PROTOTYPE DEVELOPMENT.
..................... SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND 118,811 0 118,811
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RESEARCH, 12,799,645 306,204 13,105,849
DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
EVAL, ARMY.
.....................
..................... RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST & EVAL, NAVY
..................... BASIC RESEARCH
1 0601103N UNIVERSITY RESEARCH 117,448 33,000 150,448
INITIATIVES.
..................... High-performance [3,000]
computation and data
equipment.
..................... University research [30,000]
programs.
3 0601153N DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES 484,421 484,421
..................... SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH.. 601,869 33,000 634,869
.....................
..................... APPLIED RESEARCH
4 0602114N POWER PROJECTION APPLIED 23,013 3,000 26,013
RESEARCH.
..................... Graphene electro-active [3,000]
metamaterials.
5 0602123N FORCE PROTECTION APPLIED 122,888 5,000 127,888
RESEARCH.
..................... Relative positioning of [3,000]
autonomous platforms.
..................... Resilient Innovative [2,000]
Sustainable Economies
via University
Partnerships (RISE-UP).
6 0602131M MARINE CORPS LANDING 51,112 51,112
FORCE TECHNOLOGY.
7 0602235N COMMON PICTURE APPLIED 51,477 51,477
RESEARCH.
8 0602236N WARFIGHTER SUSTAINMENT 70,547 5,500 76,047
APPLIED RESEARCH.
..................... Anti-corrosion [3,000]
nanotechnologies.
..................... Humanoid robotics [2,500]
research.
9 0602271N ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS 85,157 85,157
APPLIED RESEARCH.
10 0602435N OCEAN WARFIGHTING 70,086 70,086
ENVIRONMENT APPLIED
RESEARCH.
11 0602651M JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS 6,405 6,405
APPLIED RESEARCH.
12 0602747N UNDERSEA WARFARE APPLIED 57,484 22,000 79,484
RESEARCH.
..................... Undersea vehicle research [12,000]
academic partnerships.
..................... Undersea warfare applied [10,000]
research.
13 0602750N FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES 173,356 173,356
APPLIED RESEARCH.
14 0602782N MINE AND EXPEDITIONARY 32,160 32,160
WARFARE APPLIED RESEARCH.
15 0602792N INNOVATIVE NAVAL 152,976 152,976
PROTOTYPES (INP) APPLIED
RESEARCH.
16 0602861N SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 79,254 79,254
MANAGEMENT--ONR FIELD
ACITIVITIES.
..................... SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH 975,915 35,500 1,011,415
.....................
..................... ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT
17 0603123N FORCE PROTECTION ADVANCED 21,661 21,661
TECHNOLOGY.
18 0603271N ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS 8,146 8,146
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
19 0603640M USMC ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 224,155 20,300 244,455
DEMONSTRATION (ATD).
..................... Marine Corps UFR-- [5,300]
Maritime Targeting Cell-
Expeditionary.
..................... Marine Corps UFR-- [10,000]
Unmanned adversary
technology investment.
..................... Unmanned systems [5,000]
interoperability.
20 0603651M JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS 13,429 13,429
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
21 0603673N FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES 265,299 265,299
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT.
22 0603680N MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY 57,236 57,236
PROGRAM.
23 0603729N WARFIGHTER PROTECTION 4,935 4,935
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
24 0603758N NAVY WARFIGHTING 47,167 47,167
EXPERIMENTS AND
DEMONSTRATIONS.
25 0603782N MINE AND EXPEDITIONARY 1,981 1,981
WARFARE ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY.
26 0603801N INNOVATIVE NAVAL 133,779 -20,000 113,779
PROTOTYPES (INP)
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Naval prototypes [-20,000]
reduction.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 777,788 300 778,088
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
27 0603128N UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEM... 16,879 45,000 61,879
..................... Marine Corps UFR--MQ-9 [20,000]
payload upgrade.
..................... Medium-altitude, long- [25,000]
endurance manned-
unmanned experimentation.
28 0603178N MEDIUM AND LARGE UNMANNED 144,846 144,846
SURFACE VEHICLES (USVS).
29 0603207N AIR/OCEAN TACTICAL 27,849 27,849
APPLICATIONS.
30 0603216N AVIATION SURVIVABILITY... 16,815 16,815
31 0603239N NAVAL CONSTRUCTION FORCES 5,290 5,290
33 0603254N ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.. 17,612 17,612
34 0603261N TACTICAL AIRBORNE 3,111 3,111
RECONNAISSANCE.
35 0603382N ADVANCED COMBAT SYSTEMS 32,310 32,310
TECHNOLOGY.
36 0603502N SURFACE AND SHALLOW WATER 58,013 58,013
MINE COUNTERMEASURES.
37 0603506N SURFACE SHIP TORPEDO 1,862 1,862
DEFENSE.
38 0603512N CARRIER SYSTEMS 7,182 7,182
DEVELOPMENT.
39 0603525N PILOT FISH............... 408,087 76,600 484,687
..................... Navy UFR--Classified..... [76,600]
40 0603527N RETRACT LARCH............ 44,197 44,197
41 0603536N RETRACT JUNIPER.......... 144,541 144,541
42 0603542N RADIOLOGICAL CONTROL..... 761 761
43 0603553N SURFACE ASW.............. 1,144 1,144
44 0603561N ADVANCED SUBMARINE SYSTEM 99,782 99,782
DEVELOPMENT.
45 0603562N SUBMARINE TACTICAL 14,059 14,059
WARFARE SYSTEMS.
46 0603563N SHIP CONCEPT ADVANCED 111,590 111,590
DESIGN.
47 0603564N SHIP PRELIMINARY DESIGN & 106,957 106,957
FEASIBILITY STUDIES.
48 0603570N ADVANCED NUCLEAR POWER 203,572 203,572
SYSTEMS.
49 0603573N ADVANCED SURFACE 78,122 78,122
MACHINERY SYSTEMS.
50 0603576N CHALK EAGLE.............. 80,270 80,270
51 0603581N LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP 84,924 84,924
(LCS).
52 0603582N COMBAT SYSTEM INTEGRATION 17,322 17,322
53 0603595N OHIO REPLACEMENT......... 296,231 296,231
54 0603596N LCS MISSION MODULES...... 75,995 75,995
55 0603597N AUTOMATED TEST AND RE- 7,805 7,805
TEST (ATRT).
56 0603599N FRIGATE DEVELOPMENT...... 109,459 109,459
57 0603609N CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS... 7,296 7,296
58 0603635M MARINE CORPS GROUND 77,065 77,065
COMBAT/SUPPORT SYSTEM.
59 0603654N JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE 34,785 34,785
ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT.
60 0603713N OCEAN ENGINEERING 8,774 8,774
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
61 0603721N ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. 20,677 20,677
62 0603724N NAVY ENERGY PROGRAM...... 33,824 33,824
63 0603725N FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT... 6,327 6,327
64 0603734N CHALK CORAL.............. 579,389 579,389
65 0603739N NAVY LOGISTIC 669 669
PRODUCTIVITY.
66 0603746N RETRACT MAPLE............ 295,295 295,295
67 0603748N LINK PLUMERIA............ 692,280 692,280
68 0603751N RETRACT ELM.............. 83,904 83,904
69 0603764M LINK EVERGREEN........... 221,253 43,200 264,453
..................... Marine Corps UFR-- [43,200]
Additional development.
71 0603790N NATO RESEARCH AND 5,805 5,805
DEVELOPMENT.
72 0603795N LAND ATTACK TECHNOLOGY... 4,017 4,017
73 0603851M JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS 29,589 29,589
TESTING.
74 0603860N JOINT PRECISION APPROACH 24,450 24,450
AND LANDING SYSTEMS--DEM/
VAL.
75 0603925N DIRECTED ENERGY AND 81,803 88,300 170,103
ELECTRIC WEAPON SYSTEMS.
..................... Navy UFR--HELIOS SNLWS [88,300]
Increment1.5.
76 0604014N F/A -18 INFRARED SEARCH 48,793 48,793
AND TRACK (IRST).
77 0604027N DIGITAL WARFARE OFFICE... 46,769 11,500 58,269
..................... Navy UFR--Accelerate [11,500]
Naval Tactical Grid
Development for Joint
All-Domain Command and
Control (JADC2).
78 0604028N SMALL AND MEDIUM UNMANNED 84,676 84,676
UNDERSEA VEHICLES.
79 0604029N UNMANNED UNDERSEA VEHICLE 59,299 59,299
CORE TECHNOLOGIES.
81 0604031N LARGE UNMANNED UNDERSEA 88,063 88,063
VEHICLES.
82 0604112N GERALD R. FORD CLASS 121,509 121,509
NUCLEAR AIRCRAFT CARRIER
(CVN 78--80).
83 0604126N LITTORAL AIRBORNE MCM.... 18,669 18,669
84 0604127N SURFACE MINE 13,655 13,655
COUNTERMEASURES.
85 0604272N TACTICAL AIR DIRECTIONAL 33,246 33,246
INFRARED COUNTERMEASURES
(TADIRCM).
86 0604289M NEXT GENERATION LOGISTICS 1,071 1,071
87 0604292N FUTURE VERTICAL LIFT 9,825 9,825
(MARITIME STRIKE).
88 0604320M RAPID TECHNOLOGY 6,555 6,555
CAPABILITY PROTOTYPE.
89 0604454N LX (R)................... 3,344 3,344
90 0604536N ADVANCED UNDERSEA 58,473 58,473
PROTOTYPING.
91 0604636N COUNTER UNMANNED AIRCRAFT 5,529 5,529
SYSTEMS (C-UAS).
92 0604659N PRECISION STRIKE WEAPONS 97,944 97,944
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
93 0604707N SPACE AND ELECTRONIC 9,340 9,340
WARFARE (SEW)
ARCHITECTURE/ENGINEERING
SUPPORT.
94 0604786N OFFENSIVE ANTI-SURFACE 127,756 127,756
WARFARE WEAPON
DEVELOPMENT.
95 0605512N MEDIUM UNMANNED SURFACE 60,028 60,028
VEHICLES (MUSVS)).
96 0605513N UNMANNED SURFACE VEHICLE 170,838 170,838
ENABLING CAPABILITIES.
97 0605514M GROUND BASED ANTI-SHIP 102,716 102,716
MISSILE (MARFORRES).
98 0605516M LONG RANGE FIRES 88,479 88,479
(MARFORRES).
99 0605518N CONVENTIONAL PROMPT 1,372,340 126,000 1,498,340
STRIKE (CPS).
..................... Navy UFR--Additional CPS [126,000]
development.
100 0303354N ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT-- 8,571 8,571
MIP.
101 0304240M ADVANCED TACTICAL 16,204 16,204
UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM.
102 0304270N ELECTRONIC WARFARE 506 506
DEVELOPMENT--MIP.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 7,077,987 390,600 7,468,587
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPES.
.....................
..................... SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION
103 0603208N TRAINING SYSTEM AIRCRAFT. 5,864 5,864
104 0604212N OTHER HELO DEVELOPMENT... 56,444 56,444
105 0604214M AV-8B AIRCRAFT--ENG DEV.. 10,146 10,146
106 0604215N STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT.... 4,082 4,082
107 0604216N MULTI-MISSION HELICOPTER 46,418 46,418
UPGRADE DEVELOPMENT.
108 0604221N P-3 MODERNIZATION PROGRAM 579 579
109 0604230N WARFARE SUPPORT SYSTEM... 10,167 10,167
110 0604231N COMMAND AND CONTROL 122,913 39,200 162,113
SYSTEMS.
..................... Navy UFR--Naval [39,200]
Operational Business
Logistics Enterprise
(NOBLE).
111 0604234N ADVANCED HAWKEYE......... 386,860 386,860
112 0604245M H-1 UPGRADES............. 50,158 50,158
113 0604261N ACOUSTIC SEARCH SENSORS.. 46,066 46,066
114 0604262N V-22A.................... 107,984 107,984
115 0604264N AIR CREW SYSTEMS 22,746 22,746
DEVELOPMENT.
116 0604269N EA-18.................... 68,425 68,425
117 0604270N ELECTRONIC WARFARE 139,535 12,000 151,535
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Marine Corps UFR-- [6,500]
Integration of EM
spectrum ops into AN/ALQ-
231(V).
..................... Marine Corps UFR-- [5,500]
Integration of multi-
domain capabilities into
AN/ALQ-231(V).
118 0604273M EXECUTIVE HELO 45,932 45,932
DEVELOPMENT.
119 0604274N NEXT GENERATION JAMMER 243,923 243,923
(NGJ).
120 0604280N JOINT TACTICAL RADIO 234,434 8,300 242,734
SYSTEM--NAVY (JTRS-NAVY).
..................... Navy UFR--Accelerate [8,300]
Naval Tactical Grid
Development for Joint
All-Domain Command and
Control (JADC2).
121 0604282N NEXT GENERATION JAMMER 248,096 248,096
(NGJ) INCREMENT II.
122 0604307N SURFACE COMBATANT COMBAT 371,575 371,575
SYSTEM ENGINEERING.
123 0604311N LPD-17 CLASS SYSTEMS 904 904
INTEGRATION.
124 0604329N SMALL DIAMETER BOMB (SDB) 46,769 46,769
125 0604366N STANDARD MISSILE 343,511 343,511
IMPROVEMENTS.
126 0604373N AIRBORNE MCM............. 10,881 10,881
127 0604378N NAVAL INTEGRATED FIRE 46,121 13,000 59,121
CONTROL--COUNTER AIR
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING.
..................... Stratospheric balloon [13,000]
research.
128 0604419N ADVANCED SENSORS 0 15,000 15,000
APPLICATION PROGRAM
(ASAP).
..................... Program increase......... [15,000]
129 0604501N ADVANCED ABOVE WATER 77,852 77,852
SENSORS.
130 0604503N SSN-688 AND TRIDENT 95,693 95,693
MODERNIZATION.
131 0604504N AIR CONTROL.............. 27,499 27,499
132 0604512N SHIPBOARD AVIATION 8,924 8,924
SYSTEMS.
133 0604518N COMBAT INFORMATION CENTER 11,631 11,631
CONVERSION.
134 0604522N AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE 96,556 96,556
RADAR (AMDR) SYSTEM.
135 0604530N ADVANCED ARRESTING GEAR 147 147
(AAG).
136 0604558N NEW DESIGN SSN........... 503,252 503,252
137 0604562N SUBMARINE TACTICAL 62,115 62,115
WARFARE SYSTEM.
138 0604567N SHIP CONTRACT DESIGN/ 54,829 54,829
LIVE FIRE T&E.
139 0604574N NAVY TACTICAL COMPUTER 4,290 4,290
RESOURCES.
140 0604601N MINE DEVELOPMENT......... 76,027 76,027
141 0604610N LIGHTWEIGHT TORPEDO 94,386 94,386
DEVELOPMENT.
142 0604654N JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE 8,348 8,348
ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT.
143 0604657M USMC GROUND COMBAT/ 42,144 42,144
SUPPORTING ARMS SYSTEMS--
ENG DEV.
144 0604703N PERSONNEL, TRAINING, 7,375 7,375
SIMULATION, AND HUMAN
FACTORS.
146 0604755N SHIP SELF DEFENSE (DETECT 149,433 149,433
& CONTROL).
147 0604756N SHIP SELF DEFENSE 87,862 87,862
(ENGAGE: HARD KILL).
148 0604757N SHIP SELF DEFENSE 69,006 69,006
(ENGAGE: SOFT KILL/EW).
149 0604761N INTELLIGENCE ENGINEERING. 20,684 20,684
150 0604771N MEDICAL DEVELOPMENT...... 3,967 3,967
151 0604777N NAVIGATION/ID SYSTEM..... 48,837 48,837
152 0604800M JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER 577 577
(JSF)--EMD.
153 0604800N JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER 262 262
(JSF)--EMD.
154 0604850N SSN(X)................... 29,829 25,800 55,629
..................... Navy UFR--SSN(X) non- [25,800]
propulsion development.
155 0605013M INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 11,277 11,277
DEVELOPMENT.
156 0605013N INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 243,828 -10,000 233,828
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Contract writing systems [-10,000]
reduction.
157 0605024N ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY 8,426 8,426
SUPPORT.
158 0605180N TACAMO MODERNIZATION..... 150,592 367,200 517,792
..................... Navy UFR--Acceleration of [367,200]
EC-130J-30 TACAMO
Recapitalization.
159 0605212M CH-53K RDTE.............. 256,903 256,903
160 0605215N MISSION PLANNING......... 88,128 88,128
161 0605217N COMMON AVIONICS.......... 60,117 31,900 92,017
..................... Marine Corps UFR--MANGL [31,900]
Digital Interoperability.
162 0605220N SHIP TO SHORE CONNECTOR 6,320 6,320
(SSC).
163 0605327N T-AO 205 CLASS........... 4,336 4,336
164 0605414N UNMANNED CARRIER AVIATION 268,937 87,000 355,937
(UCA).
..................... Navy UFR--MQ-25 Emissions [87,000]
Control and Manned-
Unmanned Teaming.
165 0605450M JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND 356 356
MISSILE (JAGM).
166 0605500N MULTI-MISSION MARITIME 27,279 27,279
AIRCRAFT (MMA).
167 0605504N MULTI-MISSION MARITIME 173,784 173,784
(MMA) INCREMENT III.
168 0605611M MARINE CORPS ASSAULT 80,709 80,709
VEHICLES SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
169 0605813M JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL 2,005 2,005
VEHICLE (JLTV) SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
170 0204202N DDG-1000................. 112,576 112,576
174 0304785N ISR & INFO OPERATIONS.... 136,140 136,140
175 0306250M CYBER OPERATIONS 26,318 26,318
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
..................... SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 5,910,089 589,400 6,499,489
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
.....................
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
176 0604256N THREAT SIMULATOR 20,862 20,862
DEVELOPMENT.
177 0604258N TARGET SYSTEMS 12,113 12,113
DEVELOPMENT.
178 0604759N MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT..... 84,617 84,617
179 0605152N STUDIES AND ANALYSIS 3,108 3,108
SUPPORT--NAVY.
180 0605154N CENTER FOR NAVAL ANALYSES 38,590 38,590
183 0605804N TECHNICAL INFORMATION 934 934
SERVICES.
184 0605853N MANAGEMENT, TECHNICAL & 93,966 93,966
INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT.
185 0605856N STRATEGIC TECHNICAL 3,538 3,538
SUPPORT.
186 0605863N RDT&E SHIP AND AIRCRAFT 135,149 135,149
SUPPORT.
187 0605864N TEST AND EVALUATION 429,277 429,277
SUPPORT.
188 0605865N OPERATIONAL TEST AND 24,872 24,872
EVALUATION CAPABILITY.
189 0605866N NAVY SPACE AND ELECTRONIC 17,653 17,653
WARFARE (SEW) SUPPORT.
190 0605867N SEW SURVEILLANCE/ 8,065 8,065
RECONNAISSANCE SUPPORT.
191 0605873M MARINE CORPS PROGRAM WIDE 47,042 47,042
SUPPORT.
192 0605898N MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D....... 35,614 35,614
193 0606355N WARFARE INNOVATION 38,958 38,958
MANAGEMENT.
194 0305327N INSIDER THREAT........... 2,581 2,581
195 0902498N MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS 1,747 1,747
(DEPARTMENTAL SUPPORT
ACTIVITIES).
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 998,686 0 998,686
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT
199 0604840M F-35 C2D2................ 515,746 515,746
200 0604840N F-35 C2D2................ 481,962 481,962
201 0605520M MARINE CORPS AIR DEFENSE 65,381 65,381
WEAPONS SYSTEMS
(MARFORRES).
202 0607658N COOPERATIVE ENGAGEMENT 176,486 176,486
CAPABILITY (CEC).
203 0101221N STRATEGIC SUB & WEAPONS 177,098 8,000 185,098
SYSTEM SUPPORT.
..................... Strategic weapons system [8,000]
shipboard navigation
modernization.
204 0101224N SSBN SECURITY TECHNOLOGY 45,775 45,775
PROGRAM.
205 0101226N SUBMARINE ACOUSTIC 64,752 64,752
WARFARE DEVELOPMENT.
206 0101402N NAVY STRATEGIC 35,451 35,451
COMMUNICATIONS.
207 0204136N F/A-18 SQUADRONS......... 189,224 3,000 192,224
..................... Neural network algorithms [3,000]
on advanced processors.
208 0204228N SURFACE SUPPORT.......... 13,733 13,733
209 0204229N TOMAHAWK AND TOMAHAWK 132,181 132,181
MISSION PLANNING CENTER
(TMPC).
210 0204311N INTEGRATED SURVEILLANCE 84,276 84,276
SYSTEM.
211 0204313N SHIP-TOWED ARRAY 6,261 6,261
SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS.
212 0204413N AMPHIBIOUS TACTICAL 1,657 1,657
SUPPORT UNITS
(DISPLACEMENT CRAFT).
213 0204460M GROUND/AIR TASK ORIENTED 21,367 47,000 68,367
RADAR (G/ATOR).
..................... Marine Corps UFR--Air [23,000]
traffic control Block IV
development.
..................... Marine Corps UFR--Radar [12,000]
signal processor refresh.
..................... Marine Corps UFR-- [12,000]
Software mods to
implement NIFC.
214 0204571N CONSOLIDATED TRAINING 56,741 56,741
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
215 0204575N ELECTRONIC WARFARE (EW) 62,006 62,006
READINESS SUPPORT.
216 0205601N ANTI-RADIATION MISSILE 133,520 133,520
IMPROVEMENT.
217 0205620N SURFACE ASW COMBAT SYSTEM 28,804 28,804
INTEGRATION.
218 0205632N MK-48 ADCAP.............. 114,492 114,492
219 0205633N AVIATION IMPROVEMENTS.... 132,486 132,486
220 0205675N OPERATIONAL NUCLEAR POWER 113,760 113,760
SYSTEMS.
221 0206313M MARINE CORPS 89,897 2,800 92,697
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS.
..................... Marine Corps UFR--CEC DDS [2,800]
antenna enhancements.
222 0206335M COMMON AVIATION COMMAND 9,324 3,500 12,824
AND CONTROL SYSTEM
(CAC2S).
..................... Marine Corps UFR-- [3,500]
Software development for
NIFC integration.
223 0206623M MARINE CORPS GROUND 108,235 108,235
COMBAT/SUPPORTING ARMS
SYSTEMS.
224 0206624M MARINE CORPS COMBAT 13,185 13,185
SERVICES SUPPORT.
225 0206625M USMC INTELLIGENCE/ 37,695 6,600 44,295
ELECTRONIC WARFARE
SYSTEMS (MIP).
..................... Marine Corps UFR--G-BOSS [3,700]
High Definition
modernization.
..................... Marine Corps UFR--SCINet [2,900]
transition.
226 0206629M AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT 7,551 7,551
VEHICLE.
227 0207161N TACTICAL AIM MISSILES.... 23,881 23,881
228 0207163N ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR- 32,564 32,564
TO-AIR MISSILE (AMRAAM).
229 0208043N PLANNING AND DECISION AID 3,101 3,101
SYSTEM (PDAS).
234 0303138N AFLOAT NETWORKS.......... 30,890 4,800 35,690
..................... Navy UFR--Accelerate [4,800]
Naval Tactical Grid
Development for Joint
All-Domain Command and
Control (JADC2).
235 0303140N INFORMATION SYSTEMS 33,311 33,311
SECURITY PROGRAM.
236 0305192N MILITARY INTELLIGENCE 7,514 7,514
PROGRAM (MIP) ACTIVITIES.
237 0305204N TACTICAL UNMANNED AERIAL 9,837 9,837
VEHICLES.
238 0305205N UAS INTEGRATION AND 9,797 9,797
INTEROPERABILITY.
239 0305208M DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/ 38,800 38,800
SURFACE SYSTEMS.
240 0305220N MQ-4C TRITON............. 13,029 13,029
241 0305231N MQ-8 UAV................. 26,543 26,543
242 0305232M RQ-11 UAV................ 533 533
243 0305234N SMALL (LEVEL 0) TACTICAL 1,772 1,772
UAS (STUASL0).
245 0305241N MULTI-INTELLIGENCE SENSOR 59,252 59,252
DEVELOPMENT.
246 0305242M UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS 9,274 9,274
(UAS) PAYLOADS (MIP).
247 0305251N CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS 36,378 36,378
FORCES AND FORCE SUPPORT.
248 0305421N RQ-4 MODERNIZATION....... 134,323 134,323
249 0307577N INTELLIGENCE MISSION DATA 907 907
(IMD).
250 0308601N MODELING AND SIMULATION 9,772 9,772
SUPPORT.
251 0702207N DEPOT MAINTENANCE (NON- 36,880 36,880
IF).
252 0708730N MARITIME TECHNOLOGY 3,329 3,329
(MARITECH).
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 1,872,586 1,872,586
..................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 5,313,319 75,700 5,389,019
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL
TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS
254 0608013N RISK MANAGEMENT 13,703 13,703
INFORMATION--SOFTWARE
PILOT PROGRAM.
255 0608113N NAVY NEXT GENERATION 955,151 955,151
ENTERPRISE NETWORK
(NGEN)--SOFTWARE PILOT
PROGRAM.
256 0608231N MARITIME TACTICAL COMMAND 14,855 14,855
AND CONTROL (MTC2)--
SOFTWARE PILOT PROGRAM.
..................... SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND 983,709 0 983,709
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RESEARCH, 22,639,362 1,124,500 23,763,862
DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
EVAL, NAVY.
.....................
..................... RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST & EVAL, AF
..................... BASIC RESEARCH
1 0601102F DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES 328,303 328,303
2 0601103F UNIVERSITY RESEARCH 162,403 30,000 192,403
INITIATIVES.
..................... University research [30,000]
programs.
..................... SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH.. 490,706 30,000 520,706
.....................
..................... APPLIED RESEARCH
4 0602020F FUTURE AF CAPABILITIES 79,901 79,901
APPLIED RESEARCH.
5 0602102F MATERIALS................ 113,460 12,000 125,460
..................... Continuous composites 3D [7,000]
printing.
..................... High energy synchrotron x- [5,000]
ray research.
6 0602201F AEROSPACE VEHICLE 163,032 10,000 173,032
TECHNOLOGIES.
..................... Ground test and [5,000]
development of
hypersonic engines.
..................... Hypersonic flight test [5,000]
services.
7 0602202F HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS 136,273 136,273
APPLIED RESEARCH.
8 0602203F AEROSPACE PROPULSION..... 174,683 7,000 181,683
..................... Low-cost small turbine [7,000]
engine research.
9 0602204F AEROSPACE SENSORS........ 198,918 250,000 448,918
..................... Microelectronics research [250,000]
network.
11 0602298F SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 8,891 8,891
MANAGEMENT-- MAJOR
HEADQUARTERS ACTIVITIES.
12 0602602F CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS... 151,757 151,757
13 0602605F DIRECTED ENERGY 111,052 111,052
TECHNOLOGY.
14 0602788F DOMINANT INFORMATION 169,110 169,110
SCIENCES AND METHODS.
..................... SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH 1,307,077 279,000 1,586,077
.....................
..................... ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT
17 0603032F FUTURE AF INTEGRATED 131,643 -2,900 128,743
TECHNOLOGY DEMOS.
..................... Procure Valkyrie aircraft [75,000]
..................... Program reduction........ [-77,900]
18 0603112F ADVANCED MATERIALS FOR 31,905 31,905
WEAPON SYSTEMS.
19 0603199F SUSTAINMENT SCIENCE AND 21,057 21,057
TECHNOLOGY (S&T).
20 0603203F ADVANCED AEROSPACE 45,464 45,464
SENSORS.
21 0603211F AEROSPACE TECHNOLOGY DEV/ 70,486 2,000 72,486
DEMO.
..................... B-52 engine pylon [2,000]
fairings.
22 0603216F AEROSPACE PROPULSION AND 75,273 75,273
POWER TECHNOLOGY.
23 0603270F ELECTRONIC COMBAT 46,591 46,591
TECHNOLOGY.
26 0603456F HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS 24,589 24,589
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT.
27 0603601F CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS 157,423 157,423
TECHNOLOGY.
28 0603605F ADVANCED WEAPONS 28,258 28,258
TECHNOLOGY.
29 0603680F MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY 45,259 9,000 54,259
PROGRAM.
..................... Hypersonics materials [2,000]
manufacturing.
..................... Sustainment and [7,000]
modernization research
and development program.
30 0603788F BATTLESPACE KNOWLEDGE 56,772 56,772
DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 734,720 8,100 742,820
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
31 0603260F INTELLIGENCE ADVANCED 5,795 5,795
DEVELOPMENT.
32 0603742F COMBAT IDENTIFICATION 21,939 21,939
TECHNOLOGY.
33 0603790F NATO RESEARCH AND 4,114 4,114
DEVELOPMENT.
34 0603851F INTERCONTINENTAL 49,621 49,621
BALLISTIC MISSILE--DEM/
VAL.
36 0604001F NC3 ADVANCED CONCEPTS.... 6,900 6,900
37 0604002F AIR FORCE WEATHER 986 986
SERVICES RESEARCH.
38 0604003F ADVANCED BATTLE 203,849 203,849
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (ABMS).
39 0604004F ADVANCED ENGINE 123,712 87,000 210,712
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Air Force UFR--Complete [57,000]
two prototype engines.
..................... Program increase......... [30,000]
40 0604006F ARCHITECTURE INITIATIVES. 82,438 80,000 162,438
..................... Acceleration of tactical [80,000]
datalink waveform.
41 0604015F LONG RANGE STRIKE--BOMBER 2,872,624 2,872,624
42 0604032F DIRECTED ENERGY 10,820 10,820
PROTOTYPING.
43 0604033F HYPERSONICS PROTOTYPING.. 438,378 438,378
44 0604201F PNT RESILIENCY, MODS, AND 39,742 39,742
IMPROVEMENTS.
45 0604257F ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY AND 23,745 5,000 28,745
SENSORS.
..................... Air Force automatic [5,000]
target recognition.
46 0604288F SURVIVABLE AIRBORNE 95,788 95,788
OPERATIONS CENTER.
47 0604317F TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER...... 15,768 7,500 23,268
..................... Academic technology [7,500]
transfer partnerships.
48 0604327F HARD AND DEEPLY BURIED 15,886 15,886
TARGET DEFEAT SYSTEM
(HDBTDS) PROGRAM.
49 0604414F CYBER RESILIENCY OF 71,229 71,229
WEAPON SYSTEMS-ACS.
50 0604776F DEPLOYMENT & DISTRIBUTION 40,103 40,103
ENTERPRISE R&D.
51 0604858F TECH TRANSITION PROGRAM.. 343,545 116,800 460,345
..................... Blended wing body [15,000]
prototype phase 1.
..................... C-17 active winglets [5,000]
phase 1.
..................... Cold spray technologies.. [5,000]
..................... Engine compressor blade [2,000]
coatings.
..................... KC-135 winglets.......... [10,000]
..................... NORTHCOM UFR-- [79,800]
Proliferated low earth
orbit Arctic
communications.
52 0605230F GROUND BASED STRATEGIC 2,553,541 2,553,541
DETERRENT.
54 0207110F NEXT GENERATION AIR 1,524,667 1,524,667
DOMINANCE.
56 0207522F AIRBASE AIR DEFENSE 10,905 10,905
SYSTEMS (ABADS).
57 0208030F WAR RESERVE MATERIEL-- 3,943 3,943
AMMUNITION.
59 0305236F COMMON DATA LINK 43,881 43,881
EXECUTIVE AGENT (CDL EA).
61 0305601F MISSION PARTNER 16,420 16,420
ENVIRONMENTS.
62 0306250F CYBER OPERATIONS 242,499 40,000 282,499
TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT.
..................... Coordination with private [15,000]
sector to protect
against foreign
malicious cyber actors.
..................... CYBERCOM enhanced [25,000]
attribution transition.
63 0306415F ENABLED CYBER ACTIVITIES. 16,578 16,578
66 0901410F CONTRACTING INFORMATION 20,343 -10,000 10,343
TECHNOLOGY SYSTEM.
..................... Contract writing systems [-10,000]
reduction.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 8,899,759 326,300 9,226,059
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPES.
.....................
..................... SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION
78 0604200F FUTURE ADVANCED WEAPON 23,499 23,499
ANALYSIS & PROGRAMS.
79 0604201F PNT RESILIENCY, MODS, AND 167,520 167,520
IMPROVEMENTS.
80 0604222F NUCLEAR WEAPONS SUPPORT.. 30,050 30,050
81 0604270F ELECTRONIC WARFARE 2,110 2,110
DEVELOPMENT.
82 0604281F TACTICAL DATA NETWORKS 169,836 169,836
ENTERPRISE.
83 0604287F PHYSICAL SECURITY 8,469 8,469
EQUIPMENT.
85 0604602F ARMAMENT/ORDNANCE 9,047 9,047
DEVELOPMENT.
86 0604604F SUBMUNITIONS............. 2,954 2,954
87 0604617F AGILE COMBAT SUPPORT..... 16,603 16,603
89 0604706F LIFE SUPPORT SYSTEMS..... 25,437 25,437
90 0604735F COMBAT TRAINING RANGES... 23,980 13,200 37,180
..................... Air Force combat training [7,200]
ranges.
..................... GPS denied training...... [3,000]
..................... Gulf test range [3,000]
improvement.
92 0604932F LONG RANGE STANDOFF 609,042 609,042
WEAPON.
93 0604933F ICBM FUZE MODERNIZATION.. 129,709 129,709
95 0605056F OPEN ARCHITECTURE 37,109 37,109
MANAGEMENT.
97 0605223F ADVANCED PILOT TRAINING.. 188,898 188,898
98 0605229F HH-60W................... 66,355 66,355
101 0207171F F-15 EPAWSS.............. 112,012 112,012
102 0207328F STAND IN ATTACK WEAPON... 166,570 166,570
103 0207701F FULL COMBAT MISSION 7,064 7,064
TRAINING.
105 0401221F KC-46A TANKER SQUADRONS.. 73,459 -6,000 67,459
..................... Future tanker development [-6,000]
107 0401319F VC-25B................... 680,665 680,665
108 0701212F AUTOMATED TEST SYSTEMS... 15,445 15,445
109 0804772F TRAINING DEVELOPMENTS.... 4,482 4,482
..................... SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 2,570,315 7,200 2,577,515
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
.....................
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
124 0604256F THREAT SIMULATOR 41,909 41,909
DEVELOPMENT.
125 0604759F MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT..... 130,766 130,766
126 0605101F RAND PROJECT AIR FORCE... 36,017 36,017
128 0605712F INITIAL OPERATIONAL TEST 12,582 12,582
& EVALUATION.
129 0605807F TEST AND EVALUATION 811,032 811,032
SUPPORT.
131 0605827F ACQ WORKFORCE- GLOBAL VIG 243,796 243,796
& COMBAT SYS.
132 0605828F ACQ WORKFORCE- GLOBAL 435,930 435,930
REACH.
133 0605829F ACQ WORKFORCE- CYBER, 435,274 435,274
NETWORK, & BUS SYS.
135 0605831F ACQ WORKFORCE- CAPABILITY 243,806 243,806
INTEGRATION.
136 0605832F ACQ WORKFORCE- ADVANCED 103,041 103,041
PRGM TECHNOLOGY.
137 0605833F ACQ WORKFORCE- NUCLEAR 226,055 226,055
SYSTEMS.
138 0605898F MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D....... 4,079 4,079
139 0605976F FACILITIES RESTORATION 70,788 70,788
AND MODERNIZATION--TEST
AND EVALUATION SUPPORT.
140 0605978F FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT-- 30,057 30,057
TEST AND EVALUATION
SUPPORT.
141 0606017F REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS AND 85,799 85,799
MATURATION.
142 0606398F MANAGEMENT HQ--T&E....... 6,163 6,163
143 0303166F SUPPORT TO INFORMATION 537 537
OPERATIONS (IO)
CAPABILITIES.
144 0303255F COMMAND, CONTROL, 25,340 17,000 42,340
COMMUNICATION, AND
COMPUTERS (C4)--STRATCOM.
..................... Air Force UFR--Build [12,000]
command and control
framework.
..................... Rapid engineering [5,000]
architecture
collaboration hub.
145 0308602F ENTERPRISE INFORMATION 28,720 28,720
SERVICES (EIS).
146 0702806F ACQUISITION AND 37,211 37,211
MANAGEMENT SUPPORT.
147 0804731F GENERAL SKILL TRAINING... 1,506 1,506
148 0804772F TRAINING DEVELOPMENTS.... 2,957 2,957
150 1001004F INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES. 2,420 2,420
156 1206864F SPACE TEST PROGRAM (STP). 3 3
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 3,015,788 17,000 3,032,788
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT
157 0604233F SPECIALIZED UNDERGRADUATE 5,509 5,509
FLIGHT TRAINING.
158 0604445F WIDE AREA SURVEILLANCE... 2,760 2,760
160 0604840F F-35 C2D2................ 985,404 20,000 1,005,404
..................... Program increase......... [20,000]
161 0605018F AF INTEGRATED PERSONNEL 22,010 22,010
AND PAY SYSTEM (AF-IPPS).
162 0605024F ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY 51,492 51,492
EXECUTIVE AGENCY.
163 0605117F FOREIGN MATERIEL 71,391 -5,000 66,391
ACQUISITION AND
EXPLOITATION.
..................... Program reduction........ [-5,000]
164 0605278F HC/MC-130 RECAP RDT&E.... 46,796 46,796
165 0606018F NC3 INTEGRATION.......... 26,532 26,532
167 0101113F B-52 SQUADRONS........... 715,811 715,811
168 0101122F AIR-LAUNCHED CRUISE 453 453
MISSILE (ALCM).
169 0101126F B-1B SQUADRONS........... 29,127 29,127
170 0101127F B-2 SQUADRONS............ 144,047 144,047
171 0101213F MINUTEMAN SQUADRONS...... 113,622 113,622
172 0101316F WORLDWIDE JOINT STRATEGIC 15,202 15,202
COMMUNICATIONS.
174 0101328F ICBM REENTRY VEHICLES.... 96,313 96,313
176 0102110F UH-1N REPLACEMENT PROGRAM 16,132 16,132
177 0102326F REGION/SECTOR OPERATION 771 771
CONTROL CENTER
MODERNIZATION PROGRAM.
178 0102412F NORTH WARNING SYSTEM 99 30,100 30,199
(NWS).
..................... NORTHCOM UFR--Over the [25,100]
horizon radar.
..................... NORTHCOM UFR--Polar over [5,000]
the horizon radar.
179 0102417F OVER-THE-HORIZON 42,300 42,300
BACKSCATTER RADAR.
180 0202834F VEHICLES AND SUPPORT 5,889 5,889
EQUIPMENT--GENERAL.
181 0205219F MQ-9 UAV................. 85,135 85,135
182 0205671F JOINT COUNTER RCIED 3,111 3,111
ELECTRONIC WARFARE.
183 0207040F MULTI-PLATFORM ELECTRONIC 36,607 36,607
WARFARE EQUIPMENT.
184 0207131F A-10 SQUADRONS........... 39,224 39,224
185 0207133F F-16 SQUADRONS........... 224,573 224,573
186 0207134F F-15E SQUADRONS.......... 239,616 239,616
187 0207136F MANNED DESTRUCTIVE 15,855 15,855
SUPPRESSION.
188 0207138F F-22A SQUADRONS.......... 647,296 647,296
189 0207142F F-35 SQUADRONS........... 69,365 69,365
190 0207146F F-15EX................... 118,126 118,126
191 0207161F TACTICAL AIM MISSILES.... 32,974 32,974
192 0207163F ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR- 51,288 51,288
TO-AIR MISSILE (AMRAAM).
193 0207227F COMBAT RESCUE--PARARESCUE 852 852
194 0207247F AF TENCAP................ 23,685 23,685
195 0207249F PRECISION ATTACK SYSTEMS 12,083 12,083
PROCUREMENT.
196 0207253F COMPASS CALL............. 91,266 91,266
197 0207268F AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT 103,715 3,000 106,715
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
..................... Additive manufacturing... [3,000]
198 0207325F JOINT AIR-TO-SURFACE 117,325 117,325
STANDOFF MISSILE (JASSM).
199 0207327F SMALL DIAMETER BOMB (SDB) 27,109 27,109
201 0207412F CONTROL AND REPORTING 9,875 9,875
CENTER (CRC).
202 0207417F AIRBORNE WARNING AND 171,014 171,014
CONTROL SYSTEM (AWACS).
203 0207418F AFSPECWAR--TACP.......... 4,598 4,598
205 0207431F COMBAT AIR INTELLIGENCE 21,863 21,863
SYSTEM ACTIVITIES.
206 0207438F THEATER BATTLE MANAGEMENT 7,905 7,905
(TBM) C4I.
207 0207439F ELECTRONIC WARFARE 15,000 15,000
INTEGRATED REPROGRAMMING
(EWIR).
208 0207444F TACTICAL AIR CONTROL 13,081 13,081
PARTY-MOD.
209 0207452F DCAPES................... 4,305 4,305
210 0207521F AIR FORCE CALIBRATION 1,984 1,984
PROGRAMS.
211 0207522F AIRBASE AIR DEFENSE 7,392 7,392
SYSTEMS (ABADS).
212 0207573F NATIONAL TECHNICAL 1,971 1,971
NUCLEAR FORENSICS.
213 0207590F SEEK EAGLE............... 30,539 30,539
214 0207601F USAF MODELING AND 17,110 17,110
SIMULATION.
215 0207605F WARGAMING AND SIMULATION 7,535 7,535
CENTERS.
216 0207610F BATTLEFIELD ABN COMM NODE 32,008 32,008
(BACN).
217 0207697F DISTRIBUTED TRAINING AND 4,007 4,007
EXERCISES.
218 0208006F MISSION PLANNING SYSTEMS. 92,557 92,557
219 0208007F TACTICAL DECEPTION....... 489 489
220 0208064F OPERATIONAL HQ--CYBER.... 2,115 2,115
221 0208087F DISTRIBUTED CYBER WARFARE 72,487 72,487
OPERATIONS.
222 0208088F AF DEFENSIVE CYBERSPACE 18,449 18,449
OPERATIONS.
223 0208097F JOINT CYBER COMMAND AND 79,079 79,079
CONTROL (JCC2).
224 0208099F UNIFIED PLATFORM (UP).... 101,893 101,893
228 0208288F INTEL DATA APPLICATIONS.. 493 493
229 0301025F GEOBASE.................. 2,782 2,782
231 0301113F CYBER SECURITY 5,224 5,224
INTELLIGENCE SUPPORT.
238 0301401F AIR FORCE SPACE AND CYBER 2,463 2,463
NON-TRADITIONAL ISR FOR
BATTLESPACE AWARENESS.
239 0302015F E-4B NATIONAL AIRBORNE 26,331 26,331
OPERATIONS CENTER (NAOC).
240 0303131F MINIMUM ESSENTIAL 58,165 58,165
EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS
NETWORK (MEECN).
242 0303140F INFORMATION SYSTEMS 8,032 -5,000 3,032
SECURITY PROGRAM.
..................... Identity, credentialing, [-5,000]
and access management
reduction.
243 0303142F GLOBAL FORCE MANAGEMENT-- 452 452
DATA INITIATIVE.
244 0303248F ALL DOMAIN COMMON 64,000 64,000
PLATFORM.
246 0304260F AIRBORNE SIGINT 97,546 97,546
ENTERPRISE.
247 0304310F COMMERCIAL ECONOMIC 3,770 3,770
ANALYSIS.
251 0305020F CCMD INTELLIGENCE 1,663 1,663
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.
252 0305022F ISR MODERNIZATION & 18,888 18,888
AUTOMATION DVMT (IMAD).
253 0305099F GLOBAL AIR TRAFFIC 4,672 4,672
MANAGEMENT (GATM).
254 0305103F CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE 290 290
255 0305111F WEATHER SERVICE.......... 26,228 1,000 27,228
..................... Weather forecasting using [1,000]
machine learning.
256 0305114F AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL, 8,749 8,749
APPROACH, AND LANDING
SYSTEM (ATCALS).
257 0305116F AERIAL TARGETS........... 1,528 125,000 126,528
..................... Unmanned adversary air [125,000]
platforms.
260 0305128F SECURITY AND 223 223
INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES.
262 0305146F DEFENSE JOINT 8,733 8,733
COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
ACTIVITIES.
264 0305179F INTEGRATED BROADCAST 21,335 21,335
SERVICE (IBS).
265 0305202F DRAGON U-2............... 17,146 57,000 74,146
..................... Air Force UFR--Antenna [57,000]
replacement.
267 0305206F AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE 71,791 67,000 138,791
SYSTEMS.
..................... Air Force UFR--ASARS [67,000]
processor and antenna
development.
268 0305207F MANNED RECONNAISSANCE 14,799 14,799
SYSTEMS.
269 0305208F DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/ 24,568 24,568
SURFACE SYSTEMS.
270 0305220F RQ-4 UAV................. 83,124 83,124
271 0305221F NETWORK-CENTRIC 17,224 17,224
COLLABORATIVE TARGETING.
272 0305238F NATO AGS................. 19,473 19,473
273 0305240F SUPPORT TO DCGS 40,421 40,421
ENTERPRISE.
274 0305600F INTERNATIONAL 14,473 14,473
INTELLIGENCE TECHNOLOGY
AND ARCHITECTURES.
275 0305881F RAPID CYBER ACQUISITION.. 4,326 4,326
276 0305984F PERSONNEL RECOVERY 2,567 2,567
COMMAND & CTRL (PRC2).
277 0307577F INTELLIGENCE MISSION DATA 6,169 6,169
(IMD).
278 0401115F C-130 AIRLIFT SQUADRON... 9,752 9,752
279 0401119F C-5 AIRLIFT SQUADRONS 17,507 17,507
(IF).
280 0401130F C-17 AIRCRAFT (IF)....... 16,360 16,360
281 0401132F C-130J PROGRAM........... 14,112 14,112
282 0401134F LARGE AIRCRAFT IR 5,540 5,540
COUNTERMEASURES (LAIRCM).
283 0401218F KC-135S.................. 3,564 3,564
285 0401318F CV-22.................... 17,189 17,189
286 0408011F SPECIAL TACTICS / COMBAT 6,640 6,640
CONTROL.
288 0708055F MAINTENANCE, REPAIR & 26,921 26,921
OVERHAUL SYSTEM.
289 0708610F LOGISTICS INFORMATION 7,071 7,071
TECHNOLOGY (LOGIT).
291 0804743F OTHER FLIGHT TRAINING.... 1,999 1,999
293 0901202F JOINT PERSONNEL RECOVERY 1,841 1,841
AGENCY.
294 0901218F CIVILIAN COMPENSATION 3,560 3,560
PROGRAM.
295 0901220F PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION. 3,368 3,368
296 0901226F AIR FORCE STUDIES AND 1,248 1,248
ANALYSIS AGENCY.
297 0901538F FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 4,852 4,852
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT.
301 1202140F SERVICE SUPPORT TO 6,737 6,737
SPACECOM ACTIVITIES.
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 15,868,973 -45,000 15,823,973
..................... Program reduction........ [-150,000]
..................... Project A................ [-5,000]
..................... Project B................ [-5,000]
..................... Project C................ [-10,000]
..................... Project D................ [75,000]
..................... Project E................ [50,000]
..................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 21,743,003 248,100 21,991,103
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL
TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS
317 0608158F STRATEGIC MISSION 96,100 96,100
PLANNING AND EXECUTION
SYSTEM--SOFTWARE PILOT
PROGRAM.
318 0608410F AIR & SPACE OPERATIONS 186,918 186,918
CENTER (AOC)--SOFTWARE
PILOT PROGRAM.
319 0608920F DEFENSE ENTERPRISE 135,263 135,263
ACCOUNTING AND
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
(DEAMS)--SOFTWARE PILOT
PRO.
..................... SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND 418,281 0 418,281
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RESEARCH, 39,179,649 915,700 40,095,349
DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
EVAL, AF.
.....................
..................... RDTE, SPACE FORCE
..................... APPLIED RESEARCH
1 1206601SF SPACE TECHNOLOGY......... 181,209 23,700 204,909
..................... Battery cycle life [3,000]
improvements.
..................... Radiation hardened [5,000]
microelectronics.
..................... Space Force UFR-- [15,700]
Innovation applications.
..................... SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH 181,209 23,700 204,909
.....................
..................... ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT
2 1206616SF SPACE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 75,919 71,000 146,919
DEVELOPMENT/DEMO.
..................... Space Force UFR-- [61,000]
Accelerate Cislunar
flight experiment.
..................... SPACECOM UFR--Joint space [10,000]
rapid experimentation
and demonstration.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 75,919 71,000 146,919
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
3 1203164SF NAVSTAR GLOBAL 434,194 434,194
POSITIONING SYSTEM (USER
EQUIPMENT) (SPACE).
4 1203710SF EO/IR WEATHER SYSTEMS.... 162,274 162,274
5 1203905SF SPACE SYSTEM SUPPORT..... 37,000 37,000
6 1206422SF WEATHER SYSTEM FOLLOW-ON. 61,521 61,521
7 1206425SF SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS 123,262 7,000 130,262
SYSTEMS.
..................... Space Force UFR--Maui [7,000]
optical site.
8 1206427SF SPACE SYSTEMS PROTOTYPE 101,851 28,000 129,851
TRANSITIONS (SSPT).
..................... Space Force UFR--Expand [28,000]
Blackjack radio
frequency payloads.
9 1206438SF SPACE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY. 32,931 32,931
10 1206730SF SPACE SECURITY AND 56,546 56,546
DEFENSE PROGRAM.
11 1206760SF PROTECTED TACTICAL 100,320 9,000 109,320
ENTERPRISE SERVICE
(PTES).
..................... Space Force UFR--PTES [9,000]
Prototype Development.
12 1206761SF PROTECTED TACTICAL 243,285 243,285
SERVICE (PTS).
13 1206855SF EVOLVED STRATEGIC SATCOM 160,056 160,056
(ESS).
14 1206857SF SPACE RAPID CAPABILITIES 66,193 66,193
OFFICE.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 1,579,433 44,000 1,623,433
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPES.
.....................
..................... SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION
15 1203269SF GPS III FOLLOW-ON (GPS 264,265 264,265
IIIF).
16 1203940SF SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS 56,279 56,279
OPERATIONS.
17 1206421SF COUNTERSPACE SYSTEMS..... 38,063 38,063
18 1206422SF WEATHER SYSTEM FOLLOW-ON. 1,438 1,438
19 1206425SF SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS 127,026 9,000 136,026
SYSTEMS.
..................... Space Force UFR--Add [9,000]
space domain rapid
innovation pathfinders.
20 1206431SF ADVANCED EHF MILSATCOM 28,218 28,218
(SPACE).
21 1206432SF POLAR MILSATCOM (SPACE).. 127,870 127,870
22 1206442SF NEXT GENERATION OPIR..... 2,451,256 2,451,256
23 1206445SF COMMERCIAL SATCOM 23,400 23,400
(COMSATCOM) INTEGRATION.
24 1206853SF NATIONAL SECURITY SPACE 221,510 9,200 230,710
LAUNCH PROGRAM (SPACE)--
EMD.
..................... Space Force UFR--Liquid [9,200]
oxygen explosive tests.
..................... SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 3,339,325 18,200 3,357,525
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
.....................
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
25 1206116SF SPACE TEST AND TRAINING 19,319 33,300 52,619
RANGE DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Space Force UFR--Signal [33,300]
emulation generation
subsystem.
26 1206392SF ACQ WORKFORCE--SPACE & 214,051 214,051
MISSILE SYSTEMS.
27 1206398SF SPACE & MISSILE SYSTEMS 12,119 12,119
CENTER--MHA.
28 1206759SF MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT-- 71,503 71,503
SPACE.
29 1206860SF ROCKET SYSTEMS LAUNCH 17,769 10,000 27,769
PROGRAM (SPACE).
..................... Tactically responsive [10,000]
launch.
31 1206864SF SPACE TEST PROGRAM (STP). 20,881 20,881
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 355,642 43,300 398,942
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT
33 1201017SF GLOBAL SENSOR INTEGRATED 4,731 4,731
ON NETWORK (GSIN).
34 1203001SF FAMILY OF ADVANCED BLOS 156,788 156,788
TERMINALS (FAB-T).
35 1203040SF DCO-SPACE................ 2,150 10,900 13,050
..................... Space Force UFR--Cyber [10,900]
defense platforms for
SBIRs and ground-based
radar.
36 1203109SF NARROWBAND SATELLITE 112,012 112,012
COMMUNICATIONS.
37 1203110SF SATELLITE CONTROL NETWORK 36,810 36,810
(SPACE).
38 1203165SF NAVSTAR GLOBAL 1,966 1,966
POSITIONING SYSTEM
(SPACE AND CONTROL
SEGMENTS).
39 1203173SF SPACE AND MISSILE TEST 1,699 4,000 5,699
AND EVALUATION CENTER.
..................... Space Force UFR--Improve [4,000]
operations of payload
adapter.
40 1203174SF SPACE INNOVATION, 18,054 20,000 38,054
INTEGRATION AND RAPID
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
..................... Space Force UFR--Digitial [20,000]
core services for
distributed space test
and training.
41 1203182SF SPACELIFT RANGE SYSTEM 11,115 11,115
(SPACE).
42 1203265SF GPS III SPACE SEGMENT.... 7,207 7,207
43 1203330SF SPACE SUPERIORITY ISR.... 18,109 18,109
44 1203620SF NATIONAL SPACE DEFENSE 1,280 1,280
CENTER.
45 1203873SF BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 12,292 12,292
RADARS.
46 1203906SF NCMC--TW/AA SYSTEM....... 9,858 9,858
47 1203913SF NUDET DETECTION SYSTEM 45,887 45,887
(SPACE).
48 1203940SF SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS 64,763 64,763
OPERATIONS.
49 1206423SF GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM 413,766 413,766
III--OPERATIONAL CONTROL
SEGMENT.
53 1206770SF ENTERPRISE GROUND 191,713 191,713
SERVICES.
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 4,474,809 289,000 4,763,809
..................... Program increase......... [10,000]
..................... Space Force UFR-- [279,000]
classified.
..................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 5,585,009 323,900 5,908,909
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... SOFTWARE & DIGITAL
TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS
54 1203614SF JSPOC MISSION SYSTEM..... 154,529 154,529
..................... SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE & 154,529 0 154,529
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RDTE, SPACE FORCE.. 11,271,066 524,100 11,795,166
.....................
..................... RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST & EVAL, DW
..................... BASIC RESEARCH
1 0601000BR DTRA BASIC RESEARCH...... 11,828 11,828
2 0601101E DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES 395,781 15,000 410,781
..................... Increase for DARPA-funded [15,000]
university research
activities.
3 0601108D8Z HIGH ENERGY LASER 15,390 15,390
RESEARCH INITIATIVES.
4 0601110D8Z BASIC RESEARCH 39,828 32,500 72,328
INITIATIVES.
..................... DEPSCoR.................. [10,000]
..................... Minerva management and [22,500]
social science research.
5 0601117E BASIC OPERATIONAL MEDICAL 76,018 5,000 81,018
RESEARCH SCIENCE.
..................... Traumatic brain injury [5,000]
research.
6 0601120D8Z NATIONAL DEFENSE 112,195 1,500 113,695
EDUCATION PROGRAM.
..................... DOD laboratory workforce [1,500]
development program.
7 0601228D8Z HISTORICALLY BLACK 31,136 31,136
COLLEGES AND
UNIVERSITIES/MINORITY
INSTITUTIONS.
8 0601384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 34,708 34,708
DEFENSE PROGRAM.
..................... SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH.. 716,884 54,000 770,884
.....................
..................... APPLIED RESEARCH
9 0602000D8Z JOINT MUNITIONS 19,591 19,591
TECHNOLOGY.
10 0602115E BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY.... 108,698 15,000 123,698
..................... Program increase......... [15,000]
12 0602230D8Z DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY 22,918 50,000 72,918
INNOVATION.
..................... 6G and beyond [50,000]
experimentation efforts.
13 0602234D8Z LINCOLN LABORATORY 55,692 55,692
RESEARCH PROGRAM.
14 0602251D8Z APPLIED RESEARCH FOR THE 65,015 65,015
ADVANCEMENT OF S&T
PRIORITIES.
15 0602303E INFORMATION & 430,363 315,000 745,363
COMMUNICATIONS
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... National Security [200,000]
Commission on Artificial
Intelligence
implementation.
..................... Program increase......... [15,000]
..................... Quantum computing [100,000]
acceleration.
16 0602383E BIOLOGICAL WARFARE 31,421 31,421
DEFENSE.
17 0602384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 206,956 206,956
DEFENSE PROGRAM.
18 0602668D8Z CYBER SECURITY RESEARCH.. 15,380 15,380
19 0602702E TACTICAL TECHNOLOGY...... 202,515 202,515
20 0602715E MATERIALS AND BIOLOGICAL 317,024 15,000 332,024
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Program increase......... [15,000]
21 0602716E ELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGY... 357,384 15,000 372,384
..................... Program increase......... [15,000]
22 0602718BR COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS 197,011 197,011
DESTRUCTION APPLIED
RESEARCH.
23 0602751D8Z SOFTWARE ENGINEERING 9,601 9,601
INSTITUTE (SEI) APPLIED
RESEARCH.
24 0602890D8Z HIGH ENERGY LASER 45,997 45,997
RESEARCH.
25 1160401BB SOF TECHNOLOGY 44,829 44,829
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH 2,130,395 410,000 2,540,395
.....................
..................... ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT
26 0603000D8Z JOINT MUNITIONS ADVANCED 23,213 23,213
TECHNOLOGY.
27 0603121D8Z SO/LIC ADVANCED 4,665 4,665
DEVELOPMENT.
28 0603122D8Z COMBATING TERRORISM 69,376 69,376
TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT.
29 0603133D8Z FOREIGN COMPARATIVE 25,432 20,000 45,432
TESTING.
..................... Domestic comparative [20,000]
testing program.
31 0603160BR COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS 399,362 399,362
DESTRUCTION ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
32 0603176C ADVANCED CONCEPTS AND 15,800 5,200 21,000
PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT.
..................... MDA UFR--Cybersecurity [5,200]
improvements.
33 0603180C ADVANCED RESEARCH........ 21,466 5,000 26,466
..................... High speed flight [5,000]
experiment testing.
34 0603183D8Z JOINT HYPERSONIC 51,340 51,340
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
&TRANSITION.
35 0603225D8Z JOINT DOD-DOE MUNITIONS 19,063 19,063
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
36 0603286E ADVANCED AEROSPACE 174,043 174,043
SYSTEMS.
37 0603287E SPACE PROGRAMS AND 101,524 101,524
TECHNOLOGY.
38 0603288D8Z ANALYTIC ASSESSMENTS..... 24,012 24,012
39 0603289D8Z ADVANCED INNOVATIVE 51,513 51,513
ANALYSIS AND CONCEPTS.
42 0603338D8Z DEFENSE MODERNIZATION AND 115,443 75,000 190,443
PROTOTYPING.
..................... Rapid Innovation Program. [75,000]
43 0603342D8Z DEFENSE INNOVATION UNIT 31,873 31,873
(DIU).
44 0603375D8Z TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION.... 54,433 54,433
45 0603384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 197,824 197,824
DEFENSE PROGRAM--
ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT.
46 0603527D8Z RETRACT LARCH............ 99,175 99,175
47 0603618D8Z JOINT ELECTRONIC ADVANCED 18,221 18,221
TECHNOLOGY.
48 0603648D8Z JOINT CAPABILITY 102,669 102,669
TECHNOLOGY
DEMONSTRATIONS.
49 0603662D8Z NETWORKED COMMUNICATIONS 2,984 2,984
CAPABILITIES.
50 0603680D8Z DEFENSE-WIDE 134,022 11,500 145,522
MANUFACTURING SCIENCE
AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.
..................... Certification-based [3,000]
workforce training
programs for
manufacturing.
..................... Cybersecurity for [3,000]
industrial control
systems.
..................... Data analytics and visual [3,000]
system.
..................... Integrated silicon-based [2,500]
lasers.
51 0603680S MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY 37,543 9,000 46,543
PROGRAM.
..................... HPC-enabled large-scale [4,000]
advanced manufacturing.
..................... Steel Performance [5,000]
Initiative.
53 0603712S GENERIC LOGISTICS R&D 12,418 12,418
TECHNOLOGY
DEMONSTRATIONS.
54 0603716D8Z STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL 51,863 51,863
RESEARCH PROGRAM.
55 0603720S MICROELECTRONICS 160,821 160,821
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
AND SUPPORT.
56 0603727D8Z JOINT WARFIGHTING PROGRAM 2,169 2,169
57 0603739E ADVANCED ELECTRONICS 116,716 15,000 131,716
TECHNOLOGIES.
..................... Program increase......... [15,000]
58 0603760E COMMAND, CONTROL AND 251,794 15,000 266,794
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS.
..................... Program increase......... [15,000]
59 0603766E NETWORK-CENTRIC WARFARE 584,771 105,000 689,771
TECHNOLOGY.
..................... Artificial intelligence [100,000]
research activities.
..................... Deep water active [5,000]
technologies.
60 0603767E SENSOR TECHNOLOGY........ 294,792 -35,000 259,792
..................... Program reduction........ [-35,000]
61 0603769D8Z DISTRIBUTED LEARNING 6,398 6,398
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT.
62 0603781D8Z SOFTWARE ENGINEERING 14,677 14,677
INSTITUTE.
65 0603924D8Z HIGH ENERGY LASER 107,397 107,397
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
PROGRAM.
66 0603941D8Z TEST & EVALUATION SCIENCE 267,161 267,161
& TECHNOLOGY.
67 0603950D8Z NATIONAL SECURITY 21,270 21,270
INNOVATION NETWORK.
68 0604055D8Z OPERATIONAL ENERGY 74,300 74,300
CAPABILITY IMPROVEMENT.
74 1160402BB SOF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 93,415 93,415
DEVELOPMENT.
75 1206310SDA SPACE SCIENCE AND 172,638 172,638
TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 4,007,596 225,700 4,233,296
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... ADVANCED COMPONENT
DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
76 0603161D8Z NUCLEAR AND CONVENTIONAL 28,687 28,687
PHYSICAL SECURITY
EQUIPMENT RDT&E ADC&P.
77 0603600D8Z WALKOFF.................. 108,652 108,652
79 0603851D8Z ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY 71,429 71,429
TECHNICAL CERTIFICATION
PROGRAM.
80 0603881C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 277,949 2,000 279,949
TERMINAL DEFENSE SEGMENT.
..................... Survivability planning [2,000]
and intercept evaluation
tool.
81 0603882C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 745,144 745,144
MIDCOURSE DEFENSE
SEGMENT.
82 0603884BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 129,445 129,445
DEFENSE PROGRAM--DEM/VAL.
83 0603884C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 224,750 3,012 227,762
SENSORS.
..................... MDA UFR--Cybersecurity [3,012]
improvements.
84 0603890C BMD ENABLING PROGRAMS.... 595,301 119,196 714,497
..................... MDA UFR--Cybersecurity [44,830]
improvements.
..................... MDA UFR--System [20,166]
survivability in
radiation environments.
..................... MDA UFR--Tower-based fire [27,000]
control sensor for
cruise missile defense.
..................... NORTHCOM UFR--NCR [27,200]
elevated radar.
85 0603891C SPECIAL PROGRAMS--MDA.... 413,374 413,374
86 0603892C AEGIS BMD................ 732,512 48,400 780,912
..................... MDA UFR--Radar upgrades.. [48,400]
87 0603896C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 603,448 6,476 609,924
COMMAND AND CONTROL,
BATTLE MANAGEMENT AND
COMMUNICATI.
..................... MDA UFR--Cybersecurity [2,000]
improvements.
..................... MDA UFR--JADC2 [4,476]
integration.
88 0603898C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 50,594 50,594
JOINT WARFIGHTER SUPPORT.
89 0603904C MISSILE DEFENSE 52,403 52,403
INTEGRATION & OPERATIONS
CENTER (MDIOC).
90 0603906C REGARDING TRENCH......... 11,952 11,952
91 0603907C SEA BASED X-BAND RADAR 147,241 147,241
(SBX).
92 0603913C ISRAELI COOPERATIVE 300,000 300,000
PROGRAMS.
93 0603914C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 362,906 362,906
TEST.
94 0603915C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 553,334 553,334
TARGETS.
96 0603923D8Z COALITION WARFARE........ 5,103 5,103
97 0604011D8Z NEXT GENERATION 374,665 100,000 474,665
INFORMATION
COMMUNICATIONS
TECHNOLOGY (5G).
..................... 5G acceleration [100,000]
activities.
98 0604016D8Z DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 3,259 3,259
CORROSION PROGRAM.
99 0604102C GUAM DEFENSE DEVELOPMENT. 78,300 154,450 232,750
..................... INDOPACOM UFR--Guam [154,450]
Defense System.
103 0604181C HYPERSONIC DEFENSE....... 247,931 61,865 309,796
..................... MDA UFR--Accelerate [61,865]
hypersonic defensive
systems.
104 0604250D8Z ADVANCED INNOVATIVE 716,456 -35,000 681,456
TECHNOLOGIES.
..................... Program increase--Project [60,000]
B.
..................... Program reduction-- [-10,000]
Project A.
..................... Program reduction-- [-100,000]
strategic capabilities
research and prototyping.
..................... Thermionic energy [15,000]
generation.
105 0604294D8Z TRUSTED & ASSURED 509,195 509,195
MICROELECTRONICS.
106 0604331D8Z RAPID PROTOTYPING PROGRAM 103,575 -50,000 53,575
..................... Program reduction--joint [-50,000]
affordable kill chain.
107 0604341D8Z DEFENSE INNOVATION UNIT 11,213 11,213
(DIU) PROTOTYPING.
108 0604400D8Z DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 2,778 2,778
(DOD) UNMANNED SYSTEM
COMMON DEVELOPMENT.
109 0604551BR CATAPULT................. 7,166 7,166
110 0604555D8Z OPERATIONAL ENERGY 23,200 23,200
CAPABILITY IMPROVEMENT--
NON S&T.
111 0604672C HOMELAND DEFENSE RADAR-- 0 76,000 76,000
HAWAII (HDR-H).
..................... INDOPACOM UFR-- [76,000]
Restoration of HDR-H.
113 0604682D8Z WARGAMING AND SUPPORT FOR 3,519 3,519
STRATEGIC ANALYSIS (SSA).
114 0604826J JOINT C5 CAPABILITY 17,439 25,000 42,439
DEVELOPMENT, INTEGRATION
AND INTEROPERABILITY
ASSESSMENTS.
..................... Joint All-Domain Command [25,000]
and Control
experimentation.
115 0604873C LONG RANGE DISCRIMINATION 133,335 133,335
RADAR (LRDR).
116 0604874C IMPROVED HOMELAND DEFENSE 926,125 926,125
INTERCEPTORS.
117 0604876C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 32,697 32,697
TERMINAL DEFENSE SEGMENT
TEST.
118 0604878C AEGIS BMD TEST........... 117,055 117,055
119 0604879C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 77,428 77,428
SENSOR TEST.
120 0604880C LAND-BASED SM-3 (LBSM3).. 43,158 43,158
121 0604887C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 61,424 61,424
MIDCOURSE SEGMENT TEST.
122 0202057C SAFETY PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 2,323 2,323
123 0300206R ENTERPRISE INFORMATION 2,568 2,568
TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS.
125 0305103C CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE 1,142 1,142
126 1206410SDA SPACE TECHNOLOGY 636,179 13,000 649,179
DEVELOPMENT AND
PROTOTYPING.
..................... Laser communication [5,000]
ground terminals.
..................... Space laser [8,000]
communications.
127 1206893C SPACE TRACKING & 15,176 15,176
SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM.
128 1206895C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 292,811 292,811
SYSTEM SPACE PROGRAMS.
..................... SUBTOTAL ADVANCED 9,854,341 524,399 10,378,740
COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
PROTOTYPES.
.....................
..................... SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION
129 0604161D8Z NUCLEAR AND CONVENTIONAL 5,682 5,682
PHYSICAL SECURITY
EQUIPMENT RDT&E SDD.
131 0604384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 299,848 299,848
DEFENSE PROGRAM--EMD.
132 0604771D8Z JOINT TACTICAL 9,345 9,345
INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEM (JTIDS).
133 0605000BR COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS 14,063 14,063
DESTRUCTION SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT.
134 0605013BL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 4,265 4,265
DEVELOPMENT.
135 0605021SE HOMELAND PERSONNEL 7,205 7,205
SECURITY INITIATIVE.
136 0605022D8Z DEFENSE EXPORTABILITY 5,447 5,447
PROGRAM.
137 0605027D8Z OUSD(C) IT DEVELOPMENT 16,892 16,892
INITIATIVES.
138 0605070S DOD ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS 679 679
DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
140 0605080S DEFENSE AGENCY 32,254 32,254
INITIATIVES (DAI)--
FINANCIAL SYSTEM.
142 0605141BR MISSION ASSURANCE RISK 5,500 5,500
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
(MARMS).
143 0605210D8Z DEFENSE-WIDE ELECTRONIC 7,148 7,148
PROCUREMENT CAPABILITIES.
144 0605294D8Z TRUSTED & ASSURED 113,895 113,895
MICROELECTRONICS.
146 0605772D8Z NUCLEAR COMMAND, CONTROL, 3,991 3,991
& COMMUNICATIONS.
149 0305304D8Z DOD ENTERPRISE ENERGY 2,227 2,227
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
(EEIM).
150 0305310D8Z CWMD SYSTEMS: SYSTEM 20,246 20,246
DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION.
..................... SUBTOTAL SYSTEM 548,687 0 548,687
DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION.
.....................
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
151 0603829J JOINT CAPABILITY 8,444 8,444
EXPERIMENTATION.
152 0604774D8Z DEFENSE READINESS 7,508 7,508
REPORTING SYSTEM (DRRS).
153 0604875D8Z JOINT SYSTEMS 7,859 7,859
ARCHITECTURE DEVELOPMENT.
154 0604940D8Z CENTRAL TEST AND 550,140 4,000 554,140
EVALUATION INVESTMENT
DEVELOPMENT (CTEIP).
..................... Wave glider development.. [4,000]
155 0604942D8Z ASSESSMENTS AND 17,980 17,980
EVALUATIONS.
156 0605001E MISSION SUPPORT.......... 73,145 73,145
157 0605100D8Z JOINT MISSION ENVIRONMENT 71,410 71,410
TEST CAPABILITY (JMETC).
159 0605126J JOINT INTEGRATED AIR AND 52,671 52,671
MISSILE DEFENSE
ORGANIZATION (JIAMDO).
161 0605142D8Z SYSTEMS ENGINEERING...... 40,030 -15,000 25,030
..................... Program reduction........ [-15,000]
162 0605151D8Z STUDIES AND ANALYSIS 4,612 5,000 9,612
SUPPORT--OSD.
..................... Acquisition Innovation [5,000]
Research Center.
163 0605161D8Z NUCLEAR MATTERS-PHYSICAL 14,429 14,429
SECURITY.
164 0605170D8Z SUPPORT TO NETWORKS AND 4,759 4,759
INFORMATION INTEGRATION.
165 0605200D8Z GENERAL SUPPORT TO USD 1,952 1,952
(INTELLIGENCE).
166 0605384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 110,503 110,503
DEFENSE PROGRAM.
172 0605790D8Z SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION 3,639 3,639
RESEARCH (SBIR)/ SMALL
BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY
TRANSFER.
173 0605797D8Z MAINTAINING TECHNOLOGY 25,889 25,889
ADVANTAGE.
174 0605798D8Z DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY 39,774 39,774
ANALYSIS.
175 0605801KA DEFENSE TECHNICAL 61,453 -50,000 11,453
INFORMATION CENTER
(DTIC).
..................... Program reduction........ [-50,000]
176 0605803SE R&D IN SUPPORT OF DOD 18,762 18,762
ENLISTMENT, TESTING AND
EVALUATION.
177 0605804D8Z DEVELOPMENT TEST AND 27,366 27,366
EVALUATION.
178 0605898E MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D....... 12,740 12,740
179 0605998KA MANAGEMENT HQ--DEFENSE 3,549 3,549
TECHNICAL INFORMATION
CENTER (DTIC).
180 0606100D8Z BUDGET AND PROGRAM 15,438 15,438
ASSESSMENTS.
181 0606225D8Z ODNA TECHNOLOGY AND 2,897 2,897
RESOURCE ANALYSIS.
182 0606589D8W DEFENSE DIGITAL SERVICE 918 918
(DDS) DEVELOPMENT
SUPPORT.
183 0606771D8Z CYBER RESILIENCY AND 31,638 31,638
CYBERSECURITY POLICY.
184 0203345D8Z DEFENSE OPERATIONS 2,925 2,925
SECURITY INITIATIVE
(DOSI).
185 0204571J JOINT STAFF ANALYTICAL 977 977
SUPPORT.
186 0208045K C4I INTEROPERABILITY..... 55,361 55,361
189 0303140SE INFORMATION SYSTEMS 853 853
SECURITY PROGRAM.
191 0303260D8Z DEFENSE MILITARY 969 969
DECEPTION PROGRAM OFFICE
(DMDPO).
192 0305172K COMBINED ADVANCED 15,696 15,696
APPLICATIONS.
194 0305208K DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/ 3,073 3,073
SURFACE SYSTEMS.
197 0804768J COCOM EXERCISE ENGAGEMENT 29,530 29,530
AND TRAINING
TRANSFORMATION (CE2T2)--
NON-MHA.
198 0808709SE DEFENSE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY 689 689
MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE
(DEOMI).
199 0901598C MANAGEMENT HQ--MDA....... 24,102 24,102
200 0903235K JOINT SERVICE PROVIDER 2,645 2,645
(JSP).
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 37,520 37,520
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 1,383,845 -56,000 1,327,845
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT
202 0604130V ENTERPRISE SECURITY 5,355 5,355
SYSTEM (ESS).
203 0604532K JOINT ARTIFICIAL 10,033 10,033
INTELLIGENCE.
206 0607210D8Z INDUSTRIAL BASE ANALYSIS 58,189 39,250 97,439
AND SUSTAINMENT SUPPORT.
..................... Defense industrial skills [4,000]
and technology training
systems.
..................... Demonstration program on [3,000]
domestic production of
rare earth elements from
coal byproducts.
..................... Digital manufacturing.... [1,500]
..................... Industrial skills [2,500]
training.
..................... Rare earth element [7,500]
separation technologies.
..................... Submarine construction [20,750]
workforce training
pipeline.
207 0607310D8Z CWMD SYSTEMS: OPERATIONAL 18,721 18,721
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
208 0607327T GLOBAL THEATER SECURITY 7,398 7,398
COOPERATION MANAGEMENT
INFORMATION SYSTEMS (G-
TSCMIS).
209 0607384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL 58,261 58,261
DEFENSE (OPERATIONAL
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT).
215 0302019K DEFENSE INFO 16,233 16,233
INFRASTRUCTURE
ENGINEERING AND
INTEGRATION.
216 0303126K LONG-HAUL COMMUNICATIONS-- 10,275 10,275
DCS.
217 0303131K MINIMUM ESSENTIAL 4,892 4,892
EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS
NETWORK (MEECN).
218 0303136G KEY MANAGEMENT 83,751 83,751
INFRASTRUCTURE (KMI).
219 0303140D8Z INFORMATION SYSTEMS 49,191 20,000 69,191
SECURITY PROGRAM.
..................... Workforce transformation [20,000]
cyber initiative pilot
program.
220 0303140G INFORMATION SYSTEMS 423,745 40,000 463,745
SECURITY PROGRAM.
..................... Additional cybersecurity [25,000]
support for the defense
industrial base.
..................... Pilot program on public- [25,000]
private partnership with
internet ecosystem
companies.
..................... Program reduction........ [-10,000]
221 0303140K INFORMATION SYSTEMS 5,707 5,707
SECURITY PROGRAM.
222 0303150K GLOBAL COMMAND AND 4,150 4,150
CONTROL SYSTEM.
223 0303153K DEFENSE SPECTRUM 19,302 19,302
ORGANIZATION.
224 0303228K JOINT REGIONAL SECURITY 9,342 9,342
STACKS (JRSS).
226 0303430V FEDERAL INVESTIGATIVE 15,326 15,326
SERVICES INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY.
232 0305128V SECURITY AND 8,800 8,800
INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES.
235 0305146V DEFENSE JOINT 3,820 3,820
COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
ACTIVITIES.
237 0305186D8Z POLICY R&D PROGRAMS...... 4,843 4,843
238 0305199D8Z NET CENTRICITY........... 13,471 13,471
240 0305208BB DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/ 5,994 5,994
SURFACE SYSTEMS.
247 0305387D8Z HOMELAND DEFENSE 1,273 1,273
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
PROGRAM.
255 0708012K LOGISTICS SUPPORT 1,690 1,690
ACTIVITIES.
256 0708012S PACIFIC DISASTER CENTERS. 1,799 1,799
257 0708047S DEFENSE PROPERTY 6,390 6,390
ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM.
259 1105219BB MQ-9 UAV................. 19,065 19,065
261 1160403BB AVIATION SYSTEMS......... 173,537 173,537
262 1160405BB INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS 32,766 32,766
DEVELOPMENT.
263 1160408BB OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS. 145,830 145,830
264 1160431BB WARRIOR SYSTEMS.......... 78,592 4,211 82,803
..................... SOCOM UFR--Maritime [4,211]
scalable effects
acceleration.
265 1160432BB SPECIAL PROGRAMS......... 6,486 6,486
266 1160434BB UNMANNED ISR............. 18,006 18,006
267 1160480BB SOF TACTICAL VEHICLES.... 7,703 7,703
268 1160483BB MARITIME SYSTEMS......... 58,430 58,430
270 1160490BB OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS 10,990 10,990
INTELLIGENCE.
999 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...... 5,208,029 -10,000 5,198,029
..................... Project A................ [-10,000]
..................... SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL 6,607,385 93,461 6,700,846
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
.....................
..................... SOFTWARE AND DIGITAL
TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS
272 0604532K JOINT ARTIFICIAL 186,639 186,639
INTELLIGENCE.
273 0608197V NATIONAL BACKGROUND 123,570 123,570
INVESTIGATION SERVICES--
SOFTWARE PILOT PROGRAM.
274 0608648D8Z ACQUISITION VISIBILITY-- 18,307 18,307
SOFTWARE PILOT PROGRAM.
275 0303150K GLOBAL COMMAND AND 32,774 32,774
CONTROL SYSTEM.
276 0308588D8Z ALGORITHMIC WARFARE CROSS 247,452 247,452
FUNCTIONAL TEAMS--
SOFTWARE PILOT PROGRAM.
..................... SUBTOTAL SOFTWARE AND 608,742 0 608,742
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY PILOT
PROGRAMS.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RESEARCH, 25,857,875 1,251,560 27,109,435
DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
EVAL, DW.
.....................
..................... OPERATIONAL TEST & EVAL,
DEFENSE
..................... MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
1 0605118OTE OPERATIONAL TEST AND 105,394 105,394
EVALUATION.
2 0605131OTE LIVE FIRE TEST AND 68,549 68,549
EVALUATION.
3 0605814OTE OPERATIONAL TEST 42,648 20,000 62,648
ACTIVITIES AND ANALYSES.
..................... Joint Test and Evaluation [20,000]
restoration.
..................... SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT 216,591 20,000 236,591
SUPPORT.
.....................
..................... TOTAL OPERATIONAL TEST & 216,591 20,000 236,591
EVAL, DEFENSE.
.....................
..................... TOTAL RDT&E.............. 111,964,188 4,142,064 116,106,252
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
SEC. 4301. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4301. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2022 Senate
Line Item Request Senate Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY
OPERATING FORCES
010 MANEUVER UNITS...................................... 3,563,856 3,563,856
020 MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................ 142,082 142,082
030 ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE.............................. 758,174 758,174
040 THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................ 2,753,783 113,429 2,867,212
Army UFR--PM WIN-T SNAP & GRRIP for OIR............. [1,654]
Army UFR--PM WIN-T SNAP & GRRIP for OSS............. [5,775]
CENTCOM UFR--PATRIOT support........................ [106,000]
050 LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT...................... 1,110,156 1,110,156
060 AVIATION ASSETS..................................... 1,795,522 1,795,522
070 FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT.................. 7,442,976 539,825 7,982,801
Army UFR--Arctic cold weather gloves................ [13,867]
Army UFR--Arctic OCIE............................... [65,050]
Army UFR--ECWCS procurement......................... [8,999]
Army UFR--Female/small stature body armor........... [81,750]
Army UFR--Garrison Installation Facilities-Related [13,071]
Control Systems (FRCS).............................
Army UFR--Heavylift transportation for OIR.......... [33,854]
Army UFR--Industrial base special installation [14,824]
control systems....................................
Army UFR--Medical sustainment level maintenance..... [16,400]
Army UFR--Mission Partner Environment............... [6,300]
Army UFR--Support to Homeland Contingency Operatons. [228,410]
Army UFR--TADSS maintenance......................... [17,000]
CENTCOM UFR--Heavylift logistics.................... [40,300]
080 LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS....................... 580,921 34,000 614,921
CENTCOM UFR--COMSAT air time........................ [34,000]
090 LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE....................... 1,257,959 332,096 1,590,055
Army UFR--Aerial-Intelligence, Surveillance, [38,900]
Reconnaissance (A-ISR) Sustainment.................
Army UFR--Communications & Electronics Repair Cycle [3,200]
Float..............................................
Army UFR--Tactical Combat Vehicle Repair Cycle Float [89,017]
Army UFR--UH-60 L-L Repair Cycle Float.............. [125,565]
Army UFR--Weapon system software readiness.......... [75,414]
100 MEDICAL READINESS................................... 1,102,964 1,102,964
110 BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT............................. 8,878,603 67,529 8,946,132
Army UFR--Accelerate food service modernization..... [25,129]
Army UFR--Army Climate Assessment Tool (ACAT)....... [1,000]
Army UFR--Electrical grid improvements for electric [20,000]
vehicle charging stations..........................
Army UFR--GSA leased vehicles....................... [14,700]
Army UFR--Monitoring and predicting desertification. [1,200]
Army UFR--Multi-Domain Operations-Live.............. [1,500]
Army UFR--Natural infrastructure and range lands, [4,000]
climate resilence at Ft. Huachuca..................
120 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 4,051,869 840,085 4,891,954
Army UFR--Critical organic industrial base [7,400]
production capacity................................
Army UFR--Fort Belvoir CDC Restoration and [1,380]
Modernization......................................
Army UFR--Fort Polk CDC Restoration and [2,305]
Modernization......................................
Program increase FSRM to 100%....................... [829,000]
130 MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS............. 289,891 289,891
140 ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES............................... 526,517 52,000 578,517
Army UFR--EDI ADOS.................................. [52,000]
160 RESET............................................... 397,196 397,196
170 US AFRICA COMMAND................................... 384,791 133,546 518,337
AFRICOM UFR--Commercial SATCOM...................... [16,500]
AFRICOM UFR--ISR improvements....................... [67,000]
Army UFR--MQ-9 COCO Support to AFRICOM.............. [50,046]
180 US EUROPEAN COMMAND................................. 293,932 41,978 335,910
EUCOM UFR--Information Operations................... [26,765]
EUCOM UFR--Mission Partner Environment.............. [15,213]
190 US SOUTHERN COMMAND................................. 196,726 196,726
200 US FORCES KOREA..................................... 67,052 67,052
210 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS........ 621,836 64,062 685,898
Army UFR--Autonomic Security Operations Center...... [1,150]
Army UFR--Critical infrastructure risk management [13,630]
cyber resiliency mitigations.......................
Army UFR--MRCT / Cyber I&W / Ops Cell............... [4,655]
Army UFR--Security Operations Center as a Service [44,627]
(SOCaaS)...........................................
220 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSECURITY................ 629,437 96,739 726,176
Army UFR--C-SCRM supplier vetting and equipment [1,200]
inspection.........................................
Army UFR--Cybersecurity control systems assessments. [89,889]
Army UFR--Cyber-Supply Chain Risk Mgmt (C-SCRM) [2,750]
program............................................
Army UFR--Defensive cyber sensors................... [2,900]
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 36,846,243 2,315,289 39,161,532
MOBILIZATION
230 STRATEGIC MOBILITY.................................. 353,967 131,096 485,063
Army UFR--APS-3 Afloat ship use rate cost increases. [114,495]
Army UFR--Medical CBRN equipment.................... [16,601]
240 ARMY PREPOSITIONED STOCKS........................... 381,192 319,947 701,139
Army UFR--APS-1 CONUS Operational Project Care of [10,271]
Supplies in Storage................................
Army UFR--APS-2 Europe Care of Supplies In Storage.. [193,746]
Army UFR--APS-4 South Humanitarian Assistance [31,487]
Disaster Relief Site...............................
Army UFR--Medical equipment......................... [84,443]
250 INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS............................. 3,810 3,810
SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION............................... 738,969 451,043 1,190,012
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
260 OFFICER ACQUISITION................................. 163,568 163,568
270 RECRUIT TRAINING.................................... 75,140 75,140
280 ONE STATION UNIT TRAINING........................... 81,274 81,274
290 SENIOR RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS.............. 520,973 520,973
300 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING.......................... 998,869 998,869
310 FLIGHT TRAINING..................................... 1,309,556 1,309,556
320 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION.................. 218,651 218,651
330 TRAINING SUPPORT.................................... 616,380 18,100 634,480
Army UFR--ATRRS Modernization....................... [18,100]
340 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 683,569 1,394 684,963
Army UFR--Enterprise Technology Integration, [1,394]
Governance, and Engineering Requirements (ETIGER)..
350 EXAMINING........................................... 169,442 169,442
360 OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION.................... 214,923 16,155 231,078
Army UFR--Tuition assistance........................ [16,155]
370 CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING..................... 220,589 220,589
380 JUNIOR RESERVE OFFICER TRAINING CORPS............... 187,569 187,569
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 5,460,503 35,649 5,496,152
ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES
400 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 684,562 92,216 776,778
Army UFR--Second destination transportation......... [70,716]
Army UFR--Transportation management system.......... [21,500]
410 CENTRAL SUPPLY ACTIVITIES........................... 808,895 89,900 898,795
Army UFR--Advanced additive manufacturing........... [89,900]
420 LOGISTIC SUPPORT ACTIVITIES......................... 767,053 106,464 873,517
Army UFR--AMC LITeS................................. [29,104]
Army UFR--Deployments and mobilizations for [77,360]
Operation Spartan Shield (OSS).....................
430 AMMUNITION MANAGEMENT............................... 469,038 469,038
440 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 488,535 4,000 492,535
Joint Counter-UAS Office training support........... [4,000]
450 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS.......................... 1,952,742 65,383 2,018,125
Army UFR--CHRA IT Cloud............................. [5,300]
Army UFR--ERP convergence/modernization............. [49,420]
Army UFR--Harden CSS VSAT network................... [10,663]
460 MANPOWER MANAGEMENT................................. 323,273 323,273
470 OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT............................. 663,602 66,439 730,041
Army UFR--Enterprise Technology Integration, [1,393]
Governance, and Engineering Requirements (ETIGER)..
Army UFR--HR cloud and IT modernization............. [29,675]
Army UFR--integrated Personnel Electronic Records [5,371]
Management System (iPERMS).........................
Army UFR--Personnel security investigations......... [30,000]
480 OTHER SERVICE SUPPORT............................... 2,004,981 66,076 2,071,057
Army UFR--DFAS cost estimation...................... [49,983]
Army UFR--Presidential and DOD support.............. [16,093]
490 ARMY CLAIMS ACTIVITIES.............................. 180,178 180,178
500 REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT.............................. 269,009 5,000 274,009
Army real estate inventory system................... [5,000]
510 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND AUDIT READINESS............ 437,940 437,940
520 INTERNATIONAL MILITARY HEADQUARTERS................. 482,571 482,571
530 MISC. SUPPORT OF OTHER NATIONS...................... 29,670 29,670
9999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 2,008,633 54,938 2,063,571
Army UFR--Helios Dagger............................. [14,710]
SOUTHCOM UFR--Additional non-traditional ISR [22,228]
operations.........................................
SOUTHCOM UFR--Additional traditional ISR operations. [18,000]
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES................. 11,570,682 550,416 12,121,098
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -826,660 -826,660
Bulk fuel adjustment................................ [-25,560]
Foreign currency fluctuations....................... [-81,000]
Printing costs reduction............................ [-5,100]
Unobligated balances................................ [-715,000]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -826,660 -826,660
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY................. 54,616,397 2,525,737 57,142,134
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES
OPERATING FORCES
010 MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................ 10,465 10,465
020 ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE.............................. 554,992 554,992
030 THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................ 120,892 120,892
040 LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT...................... 597,718 597,718
050 AVIATION ASSETS..................................... 111,095 111,095
060 FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT.................. 385,506 385,506
070 LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS....................... 98,021 98,021
080 LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE....................... 34,368 34,368
090 BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT............................. 584,513 36,000 620,513
Army UFR--Repair Transient Training Officer Barracks [18,000]
Bldg 5406, ASA Dix.................................
Army UFR--Repair Transient Training Officer Barracks [18,000]
Bldg 5502, ASA Dix.................................
100 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 342,433 342,433
110 MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS............. 22,472 22,472
120 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS........ 2,764 2,764
130 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSECURITY................ 7,476 7,476
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 2,872,715 36,000 2,908,715
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
140 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 15,400 15,400
150 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 19,611 19,611
160 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS.......................... 37,458 37,458
170 MANPOWER MANAGEMENT................................. 7,162 7,162
180 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 48,289 48,289
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 127,920 0 127,920
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -42,995 -42,995
Bulk fuel adjustment................................ [-3,195]
Unobligated balances................................ [-39,800]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -42,995 -42,995
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES............. 3,000,635 -6,995 2,993,640
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG
OPERATING FORCES
010 MANEUVER UNITS...................................... 799,854 799,854
020 MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................ 211,561 211,561
030 ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE.............................. 835,709 835,709
040 THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................ 101,179 101,179
050 LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT...................... 34,436 34,436
060 AVIATION ASSETS..................................... 1,110,416 1,110,416
070 FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT.................. 704,827 5,000 709,827
CNGB UFR--Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support [5,000]
Teams Equipment Sustainment........................
080 LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS....................... 47,886 47,886
090 LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE....................... 244,439 244,439
100 BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT............................. 1,097,960 1,097,960
110 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 956,988 50,825 1,007,813
Army UFR--Force Projection Outload Facility......... [2,520]
Army UFR--Operational Readiness Training Complex.... [48,305]
120 MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS............. 1,047,870 1,047,870
130 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS........ 8,071 8,071
140 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES--CYBERSECURITY................ 7,828 7,828
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 7,209,024 55,825 7,264,849
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
150 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 8,017 8,017
160 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 76,993 29,994 106,987
CNGB UFR--Joint information exchange environment.... [6,300]
State Partnership Program--restore to FY21 levels... [23,694]
170 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS.......................... 101,113 101,113
180 MANPOWER MANAGEMENT................................. 8,920 8,920
190 OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT............................. 240,292 240,292
200 REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT.............................. 2,850 2,850
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 438,185 29,994 468,179
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -113,795 -113,795
Bulk fuel adjustment................................ [-3,195]
Unobligated balances................................ [-110,600]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -113,795 -113,795
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG................. 7,647,209 -27,976 7,619,233
AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND
AFGHAN NATIONAL ARMY
010 SUSTAINMENT......................................... 1,053,668 1,053,668
020 INFRASTRUCTURE...................................... 1,818 1,818
030 EQUIPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION........................ 22,911 22,911
040 TRAINING AND OPERATIONS............................. 31,837 31,837
SUBTOTAL AFGHAN NATIONAL ARMY....................... 1,110,234 0 1,110,234
AFGHAN NATIONAL POLICE
050 SUSTAINMENT......................................... 440,628 440,628
070 EQUIPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION........................ 38,551 38,551
080 TRAINING AND OPERATIONS............................. 38,152 38,152
SUBTOTAL AFGHAN NATIONAL POLICE..................... 517,331 0 517,331
AFGHAN AIR FORCE
090 SUSTAINMENT......................................... 562,056 562,056
110 EQUIPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION........................ 26,600 26,600
120 TRAINING AND OPERATIONS............................. 169,684 169,684
SUBTOTAL AFGHAN AIR FORCE........................... 758,340 0 758,340
AFGHAN SPECIAL SECURITY FORCES
130 SUSTAINMENT......................................... 685,176 685,176
150 EQUIPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION........................ 78,962 78,962
160 TRAINING AND OPERATIONS............................. 177,767 177,767
SUBTOTAL AFGHAN SPECIAL SECURITY FORCES............. 941,905 0 941,905
TOTAL AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND.............. 3,327,810 0 3,327,810
COUNTER ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND (CTEF)
COUNTER ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND (CTEF)
010 IRAQ................................................ 345,000 345,000
020 SYRIA............................................... 177,000 177,000
SUBTOTAL COUNTER ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND (CTEF)... 522,000 0 522,000
TOTAL COUNTER ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND (CTEF)...... 522,000 0 522,000
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY
OPERATING FORCES
010 MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT OPERATIONS................. 6,264,654 280,400 6,545,054
Navy UFR--Flying hour program - fleet operations.... [280,400]
020 FLEET AIR TRAINING.................................. 2,465,007 156,900 2,621,907
Navy UFR--Flying hour program - fleet replacement [156,900]
squadron...........................................
030 AVIATION TECHNICAL DATA & ENGINEERING SERVICES...... 55,140 55,140
040 AIR OPERATIONS AND SAFETY SUPPORT................... 197,904 197,904
050 AIR SYSTEMS SUPPORT................................. 1,005,932 1,005,932
060 AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE.......................... 1,675,356 222,200 1,897,556
Navy UFR--Additional aircraft depot maintenance [222,200]
events.............................................
070 AIRCRAFT DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT................... 65,518 65,518
080 AVIATION LOGISTICS.................................. 1,460,546 1,460,546
090 MISSION AND OTHER SHIP OPERATIONS................... 5,858,028 76,000 5,934,028
Navy UFR--Resilient Communications and PNT for [34,000]
Combat Logistics Fleet (CLF).......................
Navy UFR--Submarine Tender Overhaul................. [42,000]
100 SHIP OPERATIONS SUPPORT & TRAINING.................. 1,154,696 13,500 1,168,196
Navy UFR--Accelerate Naval Tactical Grid Development [200]
for Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2)...
Navy UFR--Naval Operational Business Logistics [13,300]
Enterprise (NOBLE).................................
110 SHIP DEPOT MAINTENANCE.............................. 10,300,078 39,800 10,339,878
Navy UFR--A-120 availability........................ [39,800]
120 SHIP DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT....................... 2,188,454 36,000 2,224,454
Navy UFR--CG Modernization Pricing.................. [36,000]
130 COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE........ 1,551,846 1,551,846
140 SPACE SYSTEMS AND SURVEILLANCE...................... 327,251 12,000 339,251
Navy UFR--T-AGOS maintenance and repair............. [12,000]
150 WARFARE TACTICS..................................... 798,082 798,082
160 OPERATIONAL METEOROLOGY AND OCEANOGRAPHY............ 447,486 447,486
170 COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES............................... 2,250,756 47,100 2,297,856
CENTCOM UFR--Naval patrol craft support............. [47,100]
180 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT.. 192,968 192,968
190 COMBATANT COMMANDERS CORE OPERATIONS................ 61,614 61,614
200 COMBATANT COMMANDERS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT......... 198,596 250,840 449,436
INDOPACOM UFR--Critical HQ manpower positions....... [4,620]
INDOPACOM UFR--Future fusion centers................ [3,300]
INDOPACOM UFR--ISR augmentation..................... [41,000]
INDOPACOM UFR--Mission Partner Environment.......... [54,010]
INDOPACOM UFR--Multi-Domain Training and [59,410]
Experimentation Capability.........................
INDOPACOM UFR--Pacific Movement Coordination Center. [500]
INDOPACOM UFR--Wargaming analytical tools........... [88,000]
210 MILITARY INFORMATION SUPPORT OPERATIONS............. 8,984 28,000 36,984
INDOPACOM UFR--Military Information Support Ops..... [28,000]
220 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 565,926 -5,000 560,926
Identity, credentialing, and access management [-5,000]
reduction..........................................
230 FLEET BALLISTIC MISSILE............................. 1,476,247 1,476,247
240 WEAPONS MAINTENANCE................................. 1,538,743 1,538,743
250 OTHER WEAPON SYSTEMS SUPPORT........................ 592,357 592,357
260 ENTERPRISE INFORMATION.............................. 734,970 734,970
270 SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION.......... 2,961,937 575,000 3,536,937
Program increase FSRM to 100%....................... [575,000]
280 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT.............................. 4,826,314 4,826,314
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 51,225,390 1,732,740 52,958,130
MOBILIZATION
290 SHIP PREPOSITIONING AND SURGE....................... 457,015 49,300 506,315
Navy UFR--Maritime Prepositioning Force (MPF) Engine [49,300]
Overhauls..........................................
300 READY RESERVE FORCE................................. 645,522 645,522
310 SHIP ACTIVATIONS/INACTIVATIONS...................... 353,530 353,530
320 EXPEDITIONARY HEALTH SERVICES SYSTEMS............... 149,384 14,800 164,184
Navy UFR--Expeditionary medical readiness........... [14,800]
330 COAST GUARD SUPPORT................................. 20,639 20,639
SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION............................... 1,626,090 64,100 1,690,190
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
340 OFFICER ACQUISITION................................. 172,913 172,913
350 RECRUIT TRAINING.................................... 13,813 13,813
360 RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS..................... 167,152 167,152
370 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING.......................... 1,053,104 1,053,104
380 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION.................. 311,209 311,209
390 TRAINING SUPPORT.................................... 306,302 306,302
400 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 205,219 205,219
410 OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION.................... 79,053 79,053
420 CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING..................... 109,754 109,754
430 JUNIOR ROTC......................................... 57,323 57,323
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 2,475,842 0 2,475,842
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
440 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 1,268,961 1,268,961
450 CIVILIAN MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT.......... 212,952 212,952
460 MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT.......... 562,546 562,546
470 MEDICAL ACTIVITIES.................................. 285,436 285,436
480 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 217,782 217,782
500 PLANNING, ENGINEERING, AND PROGRAM SUPPORT.......... 479,480 479,480
510 ACQUISITION, LOGISTICS, AND OVERSIGHT............... 741,045 741,045
520 INVESTIGATIVE AND SECURITY SERVICES................. 738,187 738,187
9999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 607,517 607,517
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 5,113,906 0 5,113,906
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -377,115 -377,115
Bulk fuel adjustment................................ [-54,315]
Foreign currency fluctuations....................... [-96,000]
Printing costs reduction............................ [-5,100]
Unobligated balances................................ [-221,700]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -377,115 -377,115
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY................. 60,441,228 1,419,725 61,860,953
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS
OPERATING FORCES
010 OPERATIONAL FORCES.................................. 1,587,456 45,300 1,632,756
Marine Corps UFR--Plate Carrier Gen III............. [45,300]
020 FIELD LOGISTICS..................................... 1,532,630 1,532,630
030 DEPOT MAINTENANCE................................... 215,949 215,949
040 MARITIME PREPOSITIONING............................. 107,969 107,969
050 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 233,486 233,486
060 SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION............ 1,221,117 224,000 1,445,117
Program increase FSRM to 100%....................... [224,000]
070 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT.............................. 2,563,278 2,563,278
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 7,461,885 269,300 7,731,185
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
080 RECRUIT TRAINING.................................... 24,729 24,729
090 OFFICER ACQUISITION................................. 1,208 1,208
100 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING.......................... 110,752 110,752
110 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION.................. 61,539 61,539
120 TRAINING SUPPORT.................................... 490,975 490,975
130 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 223,643 223,643
140 OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION.................... 49,369 49,369
150 JUNIOR ROTC......................................... 26,065 26,065
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 988,280 0 988,280
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
160 SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION.......................... 100,475 100,475
170 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 410,729 410,729
9999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 63,422 63,422
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 574,626 0 574,626
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -108,815 -108,815
Bulk fuel adjustment................................ [-54,315]
Foreign currency fluctuations....................... [-12,000]
Printing costs reduction............................ [-5,100]
Unobligated balances................................ [-37,400]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -108,815 -108,815
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS......... 9,024,791 160,485 9,185,276
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES
OPERATING FORCES
010 MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT OPERATIONS................. 628,522 628,522
020 INTERMEDIATE MAINTENANCE............................ 9,593 9,593
030 AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE.......................... 135,280 135,280
040 AIRCRAFT DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT................... 497 497
050 AVIATION LOGISTICS.................................. 29,435 29,435
070 COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS............................... 18,469 18,469
080 COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES............................... 136,710 136,710
090 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 440 440
100 ENTERPRISE INFORMATION.............................. 26,628 26,628
110 SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION.......... 42,311 42,311
120 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT.............................. 103,606 103,606
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 1,131,491 0 1,131,491
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
130 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 1,943 1,943
140 MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT.......... 12,191 12,191
150 ACQUISITION AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT.................. 3,073 3,073
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 17,207 0 17,207
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -17,495 -17,495
Bulk fuel adjustment................................ [-3,195]
Unobligated balances................................ [-14,300]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -17,495 -17,495
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES............. 1,148,698 -17,495 1,131,203
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE
OPERATING FORCES
010 OPERATING FORCES.................................... 102,271 45,900 148,171
Marine Corps UFR--Individual combat clothing and [45,900]
equipment..........................................
020 DEPOT MAINTENANCE................................... 16,811 16,811
030 SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION.......... 42,702 42,702
040 BASE OPERATING SUPPORT.............................. 109,210 109,210
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 270,994 45,900 316,894
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
050 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 14,056 14,056
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 14,056 0 14,056
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -7,695 -7,695
Bulk fuel adjustment................................ [-3,195]
Unobligated balances................................ [-4,500]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -7,695 -7,695
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE........... 285,050 38,205 323,255
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE
OPERATING FORCES
010 PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES............................... 706,860 706,860
020 COMBAT ENHANCEMENT FORCES........................... 2,382,448 96,500 2,478,948
Air Force UFR--Build command and control framework.. [5,000]
Air Force UFR--Weapon system sustainment............ [37,000]
CENTCOM UFR--Additional ISR......................... [53,000]
EUCOM UFR--Air Base Air Defense Operations Center... [1,500]
030 AIR OPERATIONS TRAINING (OJT, MAINTAIN SKILLS)...... 1,555,320 285,000 1,840,320
Air Force UFR--FSRM................................. [285,000]
040 DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................ 3,661,762 209,000 3,870,762
Air Force UFR--Weapon system sustainment............ [209,000]
050 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 3,867,114 744,000 4,611,114
Program increase FSRM to 100%....................... [744,000]
060 CYBERSPACE SUSTAINMENT.............................. 179,568 116,000 295,568
Air Force UFR--Weapon system sustainment............ [116,000]
070 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT..... 8,457,653 729,000 9,186,653
A-10/F-35 contract maintenance...................... [156,000]
Air Force UFR--Build command and control framework.. [112,000]
Air Force UFR--F-35 weapon system sustainment....... [185,000]
Air Force UFR--Weapon system sustainment............ [276,000]
080 FLYING HOUR PROGRAM................................. 5,646,730 469,000 6,115,730
Air Force UFR--Weapon system sustainment............ [114,000]
Restore A10s divestment............................. [272,000]
Restore C130s divestment............................ [83,000]
090 BASE SUPPORT........................................ 9,846,037 85,000 9,931,037
Air Force UFR--Build command and control framework.. [85,000]
100 GLOBAL C3I AND EARLY WARNING........................ 979,705 979,705
110 OTHER COMBAT OPS SPT PROGRAMS....................... 1,418,515 6,310 1,424,825
Commercial economic analysis program reduction...... [-3,000]
EUCOM UFR--Air base air defense..................... [110]
EUCOM UFR--Mission Partner Environment.............. [9,200]
120 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 864,761 864,761
150 SPACE CONTROL SYSTEMS............................... 13,223 13,223
160 US NORTHCOM/NORAD................................... 196,774 196,774
170 US STRATCOM......................................... 475,015 475,015
180 US CYBERCOM......................................... 389,663 31,300 420,963
CYBERCOM UFR--Acceleration of cyber intelligence.... [3,200]
CYBERCOM UFR--Acquisition personnel................. [4,800]
CYBERCOM UFR--Advanced cyber training............... [23,300]
190 US CENTCOM.......................................... 372,354 19,000 391,354
CENTCOM UFR--MISO program........................... [24,000]
Program reduction to OSCI........................... [-5,000]
200 US SOCOM............................................ 28,733 28,733
220 CENTCOM CYBERSPACE SUSTAINMENT...................... 1,289 1,289
230 USSPACECOM.......................................... 272,601 57,000 329,601
SPACECOM UFR--Bridging space protection gaps........ [30,200]
SPACECOM UFR--Pathway to full operational capability [26,800]
9999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 1,454,383 -10,500 1,443,883
Capabilities Management Office reduction............ [-5,000]
CCMD Intelligence Information Technology reduction.. [-3,000]
Strategy Coordination reduction..................... [-2,500]
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 42,770,508 2,836,610 45,607,118
MOBILIZATION
240 AIRLIFT OPERATIONS.................................. 2,422,784 2,422,784
250 MOBILIZATION PREPAREDNESS........................... 667,851 667,851
SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION............................... 3,090,635 0 3,090,635
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
260 OFFICER ACQUISITION................................. 156,193 156,193
270 RECRUIT TRAINING.................................... 26,072 26,072
280 RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS (ROTC).............. 127,693 127,693
290 SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING.......................... 491,286 491,286
300 FLIGHT TRAINING..................................... 718,742 718,742
310 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION.................. 302,092 302,092
320 TRAINING SUPPORT.................................... 162,165 162,165
330 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 171,339 171,339
340 EXAMINING........................................... 8,178 8,178
350 OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION.................... 236,760 236,760
360 CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING..................... 306,602 306,602
370 JUNIOR ROTC......................................... 65,940 65,940
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 2,773,062 0 2,773,062
ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
380 LOGISTICS OPERATIONS................................ 1,062,709 1,062,709
390 TECHNICAL SUPPORT ACTIVITIES........................ 169,957 169,957
400 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 1,005,827 1,005,827
410 SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS.......................... 31,054 31,054
420 OTHER SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES........................ 1,470,757 6,000 1,476,757
Air Force UFR--Build command and control framework.. [6,000]
430 CIVIL AIR PATROL.................................... 29,128 29,128
450 INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT............................... 81,118 81,118
9999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 1,391,720 1,391,720
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES................... 5,242,270 6,000 5,248,270
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -594,865 -594,865
Bulk fuel adjustment................................ [-150,165]
Foreign currency fluctuations....................... [-81,000]
Printing costs reduction............................ [-5,100]
Unobligated balances................................ [-358,600]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -594,865 -594,865
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE............ 53,876,475 2,247,745 56,124,220
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, SPACE FORCE
OPERATING FORCES
010 GLOBAL C3I & EARLY WARNING.......................... 495,615 25,700 521,315
Space Force UFR--Maintenance contracts for missile [25,700]
warning and defense systems........................
020 SPACE LAUNCH OPERATIONS............................. 185,700 185,700
030 SPACE OPERATIONS.................................... 611,269 9,500 620,769
Space Force UFR--Increase opeational support to [5,500]
SPACECOM...........................................
Space Force UFR--Space Commercially Augmented [4,000]
Mission Platform...................................
040 EDUCATION & TRAINING................................ 22,887 86,000 108,887
Space Force UFR--Accelerate Space Force PME......... [86,000]
060 DEPOT MAINTENANCE................................... 280,165 26,200 306,365
Space Force UFR--Weapon system sustainment.......... [26,200]
070 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 213,347 67,800 281,147
Space Force UFR--Aircraft fire training mock-up..... [1,500]
Space Force UFR--FSRM Cheyenne Mountain Complex..... [66,300]
080 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS AND SYSTEM SUPPORT............. 1,158,707 96,000 1,254,707
Space Force UFR--Weapon system sustainment.......... [96,000]
090 SPACE OPERATIONS -BOS............................... 143,520 143,520
9999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 172,755 172,755
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 3,283,965 311,200 3,595,165
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE WIDE ACTIVITIES
100 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 156,747 156,747
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE WIDE ACTIVITIES. 156,747 0 156,747
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 0
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, SPACE FORCE.......... 3,440,712 311,200 3,751,912
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE
OPERATING FORCES
010 PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES............................... 1,665,015 1,665,015
020 MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS.......................... 179,486 179,486
030 DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................ 530,540 530,540
040 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 114,987 9,000 123,987
Air Force UFR--FSRM................................. [9,000]
050 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT..... 254,831 254,831
060 BASE SUPPORT........................................ 470,801 470,801
070 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 1,372 1,372
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 3,217,032 9,000 3,226,032
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES
080 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 91,289 91,289
090 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 23,181 23,181
100 MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERS MGMT (ARPC).............. 13,966 13,966
110 OTHER PERS SUPPORT (DISABILITY COMP)................ 6,196 6,196
120 AUDIOVISUAL......................................... 442 442
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES.. 135,074 0 135,074
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -43,295 -43,295
Bulk fuel adjustment................................ [-3,195]
Unobligated balances................................ [-40,100]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -43,295 -43,295
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE........... 3,352,106 -34,295 3,317,811
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG
OPERATING FORCES
010 AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS................................. 2,281,432 2,281,432
020 MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS.......................... 582,848 5,900 588,748
CNGB UFR--HRF/CERFP sustainment..................... [5,900]
030 DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................ 1,241,318 1,241,318
040 FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION. 353,193 26,000 379,193
Air Force UFR--FSRM................................. [26,000]
050 CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT..... 1,077,654 1,077,654
060 BASE SUPPORT........................................ 908,198 17,400 925,598
CNGB UFR--Security forces hearing and comm package.. [17,400]
070 CYBERSPACE SUSTAINMENT.............................. 23,895 23,895
080 CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES............................... 17,263 17,263
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 6,485,801 49,300 6,535,101
ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES
090 ADMINISTRATION...................................... 46,455 46,455
100 RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING.......................... 41,764 41,764
SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES. 88,219 0 88,219
UNDISTRIBUTED
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -66,275 -66,275
Bulk fuel adjustment................................ [-15,975]
Unobligated balances................................ [-50,300]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -66,275 -66,275
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG.................. 6,574,020 -16,975 6,557,045
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE
OPERATING FORCES
010 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF............................... 407,240 407,240
020 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF--CE2T2........................ 554,634 123,100 677,734
AFRICOM UFR--Joint Exercise Program................. [18,000]
CENTCOM UFR--EAGER LION............................. [20,000]
INDOPACOM UFR--Joint Exercise Program............... [35,100]
Joint Exercise Program--restore to FY21 levels...... [50,000]
030 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF--CYBER........................ 8,098 8,098
050 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND COMBAT DEVELOPMENT 2,044,479 3,310 2,047,789
ACTIVITIES.........................................
SOCOM UFR--Armored ground mobility systems [3,310]
acceleration.......................................
060 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES.... 45,851 45,851
070 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND INTELLIGENCE............. 1,614,757 1,614,757
080 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND MAINTENANCE.............. 1,081,869 6,341 1,088,210
SOCOM UFR--Modernized forward look sonar............ [900]
SOCOM UFR--Personal signature management [5,441]
acceleration.......................................
090 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND MANAGEMENT/OPERATIONAL 180,042 180,042
HEADQUARTERS.......................................
100 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND OPERATIONAL SUPPORT...... 1,202,060 1,202,060
110 SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND THEATER FORCES........... 3,175,789 3,175,789
SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES........................... 10,314,819 132,751 10,447,570
TRAINING AND RECRUITING
130 DEFENSE ACQUISITION UNIVERSITY...................... 171,607 171,607
140 JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF............................... 92,905 92,905
150 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION.................. 31,669 31,669
SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING.................... 296,181 0 296,181
ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES
170 CIVIL MILITARY PROGRAMS............................. 137,311 20,000 157,311
Innovative readiness training increase.............. [5,000]
STARBASE............................................ [15,000]
190 DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY....................... 618,526 618,526
200 DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY--CYBER................ 3,984 3,984
220 DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT AGENCY.................. 1,438,296 1,438,296
230 DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT AGENCY--CYBER........... 11,999 11,999
240 DEFENSE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY AGENCY..... 941,488 5,000 946,488
DCSA Analytic tools for assessing FOCI.............. [5,000]
260 DEFENSE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY AGENCY-- 9,859 9,859
CYBER..............................................
270 DEFENSE HUMAN RESOURCES ACTIVITY.................... 816,168 15,000 831,168
Troops-to-Teachers.................................. [15,000]
280 DEFENSE HUMAN RESOURCES ACTIVITY--CYBER............. 17,655 17,655
290 DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY.................. 1,913,734 42,000 1,955,734
milCloud 2.0 migration.............................. [42,000]
310 DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY--CYBER........... 530,278 85,100 615,378
Automated C2, orchestration, other increased [25,000]
capabilities for JFHQ-DODIN........................
CYBERCOM UFR--Hardening of DODIN.................... [60,100]
350 DEFENSE LEGAL SERVICES AGENCY....................... 229,498 229,498
360 DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY............................ 402,864 402,864
370 DEFENSE MEDIA ACTIVITY.............................. 222,655 222,655
380 DEFENSE PERSONNEL ACCOUNTING AGENCY................. 130,174 130,174
390 DEFENSE SECURITY COOPERATION AGENCY................. 2,067,446 338,290 2,405,736
AFRICOM UFR--AFRICOM security cooperation program [60,000]
increase...........................................
Increase to Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative.. [50,000]
INDOPACOM UFR--INDOPACOM security cooperation [130,600]
program increase...................................
Joint Combined Exchange Training--restore to FY21 [3,190]
levels.............................................
SOUTHCOM UFR--Air Mobility Initiative............... [85,000]
SOUTHCOM UFR--Central America Border Security [9,500]
Initiative.........................................
420 DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.......... 39,305 39,305
440 DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY..................... 885,749 885,749
460 DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY--CYBER.............. 36,736 36,736
470 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE EDUCATION ACTIVITY............ 3,138,345 70,000 3,208,345
Impact Aid for children with severe disabilities.... [20,000]
Impact Aid for schools with military dependent [50,000]
students...........................................
490 MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY.............................. 502,450 502,450
530 OFFICE OF THE LOCAL DEFENSE COMMUNITY COOPERATION-- 89,686 89,686
OSD................................................
540 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE.................. 1,766,614 97,500 1,864,114
Analytical tools in evaluating energy resilience [2,000]
measures...........................................
Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup............................. [15,000]
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention nation- [15,000]
wide human health assessment.......................
Congressional Hearings and Reporting Requirements [2,000]
Tracking System modernization......................
Cost Assessment Data Enterprise..................... [3,500]
Defense Environmental International Cooperation [2,000]
program increase...................................
Interstate compacts on licensed occupations......... [4,000]
Joint Aviation Safety Council....................... [4,000]
Office of the Secretary of Defense civilian [25,000]
workforce..........................................
Personnel in the Office of Assistant Secretary of [5,000]
Defense Sustainment and Environment, Safety, and
Occupational Health................................
Strategic competition initiative.................... [20,000]
550 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE--CYBER........... 32,851 32,851
560 SPACE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY............................ 53,851 53,851
570 WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES.................... 369,698 369,698
999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS................................. 17,900,146 17,900,146
SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES................. 34,307,366 672,890 34,980,256
TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE....... 44,918,366 161,496 45,079,862
UNDISTRIBUTED
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE
998 UNDISTRIBUTED....................................... 0 -644,145 -644,145
Bulk fuel adjustment................................ [-3,195]
Foreign currency fluctuations....................... [-30,000]
Printing costs reduction............................ [-5,100]
Program reduction--SOCOM unjustified increase in [-28,650]
management and headquarters expenses...............
Unobligated balances................................ [-577,200]
SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.............................. 0 -644,145 -644,145
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE......... 0 161,496 161,496
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES, DEF
010 US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES, DEFENSE... 15,589 15,589
SUBTOTAL US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES, 15,589 0 15,589
DEF................................................
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 15,589 0 15,589
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER, AND CIVIC AID
010 OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER AND CIVIC AID....... 110,051 25,000 135,051
Program increase.................................... [25,000]
SUBTOTAL OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER, AND CIVIC 110,051 25,000 135,051
AID................................................
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 110,051 25,000 135,051
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION ACCOUNT
010 COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION........................ 239,849 239,849
SUBTOTAL COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION ACCOUNT....... 239,849 0 239,849
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 239,849 0 239,849
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ACQUISITION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
010 ACQ WORKFORCE DEV FD................................ 54,679 54,679
SUBTOTAL ACQUISITION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT.......... 54,679 0 54,679
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 54,679 0 54,679
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY
050 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY..................... 200,806 200,806
SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY............ 200,806 0 200,806
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 200,806 0 200,806
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY
060 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY..................... 298,250 298,250
SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY............ 298,250 0 298,250
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 298,250 0 298,250
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE
070 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE................ 301,768 301,768
SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE....... 301,768 0 301,768
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 301,768 0 301,768
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE
080 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE.................. 8,783 8,783
SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE......... 8,783 0 8,783
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 8,783 0 8,783
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION FORMERLY USED SITES
090 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION FORMERLY USED SITES....... 218,580 218,580
SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION FORMERLY USED 218,580 0 218,580
SITES..............................................
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.................. 218,580 0 218,580
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE....................... 253,623,852 6,947,353 260,571,205
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL
TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL
SEC. 4401. MILITARY PERSONNEL.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4401. MILITARY PERSONNEL (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item FY 2022 Request Senate Change Senate Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MILITARY PERSONNEL
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS................... 157,947,920 -496,612 157,451,308
A-10/F-35 Active duty maintainers................... 93,000
Army UFR - JTIMS exercise support................... 67,435
Army UFR - Reserve Component EDI for Rotational 55,999
Forces.............................................
Army UFR - Reserve Component Homeland Security Ops.. 228,410
CNGB UFR - CBRN Response Forces..................... 9,200
Military personnel historical underexecution........ [-950,656]
SUBTOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS.......... 157,947,920 -496,612 157,451,308
MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH CARE FUND
CONTRIBUTIONS
MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH CARE FUND 9,337,175 9,337,175
CONTRIBUTIONS......................................
SUBTOTAL MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH CARE FUND 9,337,175 0 9,337,175
CONTRIBUTIONS......................................
TOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL............................ 167,285,095 -496,612 166,788,483
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
SEC. 4501. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4501. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2022 Senate
Line Item Request Senate Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WORKING CAPITAL FUND
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY
1 INDUSTRIAL OPERATIONS........................... 26,935 26,935
2 SUPPLY MANAGEMENT--ARMY......................... 357,776 357,776
SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY............. 384,711 0 384,711
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, NAVY
1 SUPPLY MANAGEMENT, NAVY......................... 150,000 150,000
SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, NAVY............. 150,000 0 150,000
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE
2 SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS.......................... 77,453 77,453
SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE........ 77,453 0 77,453
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE
1 ENERGY MANAGEMENT--DEF.......................... 40,000 40,000
2 SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT--DEF.................... 87,765 87,765
SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE..... 127,765 0 127,765
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA
2 WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA...................... 1,162,071 1,162,071
SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA............. 1,162,071 0 1,162,071
TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND...................... 1,902,000 0 1,902,000
CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
1 CHEM DEMILITARIZATION--O&M...................... 93,121 93,121
SUBTOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE................ 93,121 0 93,121
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
2 CHEM DEMILITARIZATION--RDT&E.................... 1,001,231 1,001,231
SUBTOTAL RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND 1,001,231 0 1,001,231
EVALUATION.....................................
TOTAL CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION....... 1,094,352 0 1,094,352
DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEF
DRUG INTRDCTN
1 COUNTER-NARCOTICS SUPPORT....................... 593,250 593,250
SUBTOTAL DRUG INTRDCTN.......................... 593,250 0 593,250
DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM
2 DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM................... 126,024 126,024
SUBTOTAL DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM.......... 126,024 0 126,024
NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM
3 NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM............. 96,970 96,970
SUBTOTAL NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM.... 96,970 0 96,970
NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG SCHOOLS
4 NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG SCHOOLS............. 5,664 5,664
SUBTOTAL NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG SCHOOLS.... 5,664 0 5,664
TOTAL DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, 821,908 0 821,908
DEF............................................
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
1 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE....................... 434,700 434,700
2 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE....................... 1,218 1,218
3 RDT&E........................................... 2,365 2,365
4 PROCUREMENT..................................... 80 80
SUBTOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL........ 438,363 0 438,363
TOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL........... 438,363 0 438,363
DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
1 IN-HOUSE CARE................................... 9,720,004 30,000 9,750,004
Anomalous health incidents...................... [30,000]
2 PRIVATE SECTOR CARE............................. 18,092,679 18,092,679
3 CONSOLIDATED HEALTH SUPPORT..................... 1,541,122 1,541,122
4 INFORMATION MANAGEMENT.......................... 2,233,677 2,233,677
5 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES........................... 335,138 335,138
6 EDUCATION AND TRAINING.......................... 333,234 333,234
7 BASE OPERATIONS/COMMUNICATIONS.................. 1,926,865 1,926,865
SUBTOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE................ 34,182,719 30,000 34,212,719
RDT&E
10 R&D ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT........................ 235,556 235,556
11 R&D DEMONSTRATION/VALIDATION.................... 142,252 142,252
12 R&D ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT..................... 101,054 101,054
12 R&D MANAGEMENT AND SUPPORT...................... 49,645 49,645
14 R&D CAPABILITIES ENHANCEMENT.................... 17,619 17,619
8 R&D RESEARCH.................................... 9,091 9,091
9 R&D EXPLORATRY DEVELOPMENT...................... 75,463 75,463
SUBTOTAL RDT&E.................................. 630,680 0 630,680
PROCUREMENT
15 PROC INITIAL OUTFITTING......................... 20,926 20,926
16 PROC REPLACEMENT & MODERNIZATION................ 250,366 250,366
18 PROC MILITARY HEALTH SYSTEM--DESKTOP TO 72,302 72,302
DATACENTER.....................................
19 PROC DOD HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 435,414 435,414
MODERNIZATION..................................
SUBTOTAL PROCUREMENT............................ 779,008 0 779,008
TOTAL DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM.................... 35,592,407 30,000 35,622,407
TOTAL OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS...................... 39,849,030 30,000 39,879,030
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
SEC. 4601. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4601. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION (In Thousands of Dollars)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2022 Senate
Account State/ Country Installation Project Title Request Senate Change Authorized
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
ARMY
Army Alabama Fort Rucker AIT Barracks Complex...... 0 66,000 66,000
Army Alabama Redstone Arsenal Propulsion Systems Lab.... 55,000 55,000
Army Belgium SHAPE Headquarters Command and Control 16,000 16,000
Facility.
Army California Fort Irwin Simulations Center........ 52,000 52,000
Army Georgia Fort Gordon Cyber Instructional Fac 69,000 69,000
(Admin/Cmd) (INC 2).
Army Georgia Fort Stewart Barracks.................. 0 100,000 100,000
Army Germany East Camp Grafenwoehr EDI: Barracks and Dining 103,000 103,000
Facility.
Army Germany Smith Barracks Live Fire Exercise 16,000 16,000
Shoothouse.
Army Germany Smith Barracks Indoor Small Arms Range... 17,500 17,500
Army Hawaii Fort Shafter Cost to Complete, Command 0 55,500 55,500
& Control Facility.
Army Hawaii West Loch Naval Ammunition Storage........ 51,000 51,000
Magazine Annex
Army Hawaii Wheeler Army Airfield Aviation Unit Ops Building 0 84,000 84,000
Army Hawaii Wheeler Army Airfield Rotary Wing Parking Apron. 0 56,000 56,000
Army Kansas Fort Leavenworth Child Development Center.. 0 34,000 34,000
Army Kentucky Fort Knox Child Development Center.. 0 27,000 27,000
Army Kwajalein Kwajalein Atoll Cost to Complete, Family 0 10,000 10,000
Housing Replacement
Construction.
Army Louisiana Camp Minden Collective Training 0 13,800 13,800
Unaccompanied Housing.
Army Louisiana Fort Polk Barracks.................. 0 56,000 56,000
Army Louisiana Fort Polk Joint Operations Center... 55,000 55,000
Army Maryland Fort Meade Barracks.................. 81,000 81,000
Army New York Fort Hamilton Information Systems 26,000 26,000
Facility.
Army New York Watervliet Arsenal Access Control Point...... 20,000 20,000
Army New York West Point Military Cost to Complete, 0 17,200 17,200
Reservation Engineering Center.
Army Pennsylvania Letterkenny Army Depot Fire Station.............. 21,000 21,000
Army Pennsylvania Tobyhanna Army Depot Cost to Complete, Family 0 7,500 7,500
Housing Replacement
Construction.
Army Puerto Rico Fort Buchanan Cost to Complete, Family 0 14,000 14,000
Housing Replacement
Construction.
Army South Carolina Fort Jackson Cost to Complete, 0 21,000 21,000
Reception Barracks
Complex, Ph 1.
Army South Carolina Fort Jackson Reception Barracks 34,000 34,000
Complex, Ph2 (INC 2).
Army Texas Fort Hood Barracks.................. 0 61,000 61,000
Army Texas Fort Hood Barracks.................. 0 69,000 69,000
Army Virginia Jont Base Langley- Cost to Complete, AIT 0 16,000 16,000
Eustis Barracks Complex, Ph 4.
Army Worldwide Classified Classified Location Forward Operating Site.... 31,000 31,000
Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Minor Construction........ 35,543 35,543
Locations
Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 124,649 124,649
Locations
Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Host Nation Support....... 27,000 27,000
Locations
Army Worldwide Unspecified Worldwide Various Lab Planning & Design 0 45,000 45,000
Locations Unfunded Requirement.
SUBTOTAL ARMY 834,692 753,000 1,587,692
....................... ......................
NAVY
Navy Arizona Marine Corps Air Bachelor Enlisted Quarters 0 99,600 99,600
Station Yuma
Navy Arizona Marine Corps Air Combat Training Tank 0 29,300 29,300
Station Yuma Complex.
Navy California Camp Pendleton I MEF Consolidated 19,869 19,869
Information Center (INC).
Navy California Marine Corps Air Wastewater Treatment Plant 0 45,000 45,000
Ground Combat Center
Navy California Marine Corps Air Aircraft Maintenance 0 209,500 209,500
Station Miramar Hangar.
Navy California Marine Corps Air F-35 Centralized Engine 0 31,400 31,400
Station Miramar Repair Facility.
Navy California Marine Corps Base Camp Basilone Road Realignment. 0 85,200 85,200
Pendleton
Navy California Marine Corps Base Camp CLB MEU Complex........... 0 83,900 83,900
Pendleton
Navy California Marine Corps Base Camp Warehouse Replacement..... 0 22,200 22,200
Pendleton
Navy California Marine Corps Reserve Recruit Mess Hall 0 8,000 8,000
Depot San Diego Replacement.
Navy California Naval Air Station F-35C Hangar 6 Phase 2 75,070 75,070
Lemoore (Mod 3/4) (INC).
Navy California Naval Base Coronado CMV-22B Aircraft 0 63,600 63,600
Maintenance Hangar.
Navy California Naval Base San Diego Pier 6 Replacement (INC).. 50,000 50,000
Navy California Naval Base Ventura Combat Vehicle Maintenance 0 48,700 48,700
County Facility.
Navy California Naval Base Ventura MQ-25 Aircraft Maintenance 0 148,800 148,800
County Hangar.
Navy California Naval Weapons Station Missile Magazines (INC)... 10,840 10,840
Seal Beach
Navy California San Nicolas Island Directed Energy Weapons 19,907 19,907
Test Facilities.
Navy El Salvador Cooperative Security Hangar and Ramp Expansion. 0 28,000 28,000
Location Comalapa
Navy Florida Marine Corps Support Lighterage and Small Craft 0 69,400 69,400
Facility Blount Facility.
Island
Navy Greece Naval Support Activity EDI: Joint Mobility 41,650 41,650
Souda Bay Processing Center.
Navy Guam Andersen Air Force Aviation Admin Building... 50,890 50,890
Base
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas 4th Marines Regiment 109,507 -25,000 84,507
Facilities.
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas Combat Logistics 92,710 -28,000 64,710
Battallion-4 Facility.
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas Consolidated Armory....... 43,470 43,470
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas Infantry Battalion Company 44,100 44,100
HQ.
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas Marine Expeditionary 66,830 66,830
Brigade Enablers.
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas Principal End Item (PEI) 47,110 47,110
Warehouse.
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas Bachelor Enlisted Quarters 43,200 43,200
H (INC).
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas X-Ray Wharf Berth 2....... 103,800 -40,000 63,800
Navy Guam Joint Region Marianas Joint Communication 84,000 84,000
Upgrade (INC).
Navy Hawaii Marine Corps Base Bachelor Enlisted Quarters 0 10,000 10,000
Kaneohe Bay Phase II (INC).
Navy Hawaii Marine Corps Base Electrical Distribution 0 64,500 64,500
Kaneohe Bay Modernization.
Navy Japan Fleet Activities Pier 5 (Berths 2 and 3) 15,292 15,292
Yokosuka (INC).
Navy Japan Fleet Activities Ship Handling & Combat 49,900 49,900
Yokosuka Training Facilities.
Navy Maine Portsmouth Naval Multi-Mission Dry Dock #1 0 100,000 100,000
Shipyard Extension (INC)--Navy #1
UFR.
Navy Maine Portsmouth Naval Multi-Mission Dry Dock #1 250,000 250,000
Shipyard Extension (INC).
Navy Nevada Naval Air Station Training Range Land 48,250 -48,250 0
Fallon Acquisition--Phase 2.
Navy North Carolina Camp Lejeune II MEF Operations Center 42,200 42,200
Replacement (INC).
Navy North Carolina Marine Corps Air ATC Tower & Airfield 0 18,700 18,700
Station Cherry Point Operations.
Navy North Carolina Marine Corps Air Aircraft Maintenance 207,897 -150,000 57,897
Station Cherry Point Hangar.
Navy North Carolina Marine Corps Air F-35 Flightline Utilities 113,520 -80,000 33,520
Station Cherry Point Modernization Phase 2.
Navy North Carolina Marine Corps Base Camp Water Treatment Plant 0 64,200 64,200
Lejeune Replacement Hadnot Pt.
Navy South Carolina Marine Corps Air Aircraft Maintenance 0 122,600 122,600
Station Beaufort Hangar.
Navy South Carolina Marine Corps Air Recycling/Hazardous Waste 0 5,000 5,000
Station Beaufort Facility.
Navy Spain Naval Station Rota EDI: Explosive Ordnance 0 85,600 85,600
Disposal (EOD) Mobile
Unit Facilities.
Navy Virginia Marine Corps Base Vehicle Inspection and 42,850 42,850
Quantico Visitor Control Center.
Navy Virginia Marine Corps Base Wargaming Center (INC).... 30,500 30,500
Quantico
Navy Virginia Naval Station Norfolk CMV-22 Aircraft 0 75,100 75,100
Maintenance Hangar &
Airfield Improvement.
Navy Virginia Naval Station Norfolk Submarine Pier 3 (INC).... 88,923 -45,000 43,923
Navy Virginia Naval Weapons Station Navy Munitions Command 0 13,500 13,500
Yorktown (NMC) Ordnance Facilities
Recap, Phase 2.
Navy Virginia Portsmouth Naval Dry Dock Saltwater System 156,380 -100,000 56,380
Shipyard for CVN-78.
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor Military 56,435 56,435
Locations Construction.
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide MCON Design Funds......... 363,252 363,252
Locations
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Worldwide Various Consolidated RDT&E Systems 0 1,700 1,700
Locations Facility P&D (Naval
Station Newport).
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Worldwide Various F-35 Joint Strike Fighter 0 10,000 10,000
Locations Sustainment Center (P-
993) P&D (MCAS Cherry
Point).
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Worldwide Various HDR Hawaii: Planning and 0 9,000 9,000
Locations Design.
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Worldwide Various Lab Planning & Design 0 110,000 110,000
Locations Unfunded Requirement.
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Worldwide Various Next Generation Secure 0 4,000 4,000
Locations Submarine Platform
Facility P&D (Naval
Station Newport).
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Worldwide Various Next Generation Torpedo 0 1,200 1,200
Locations Integration Lab P&D
(Naval Station Newport).
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Worldwide Various PDI: Planning & Design 0 68,200 68,200
Locations Unfunded Requirement.
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Worldwide Various Planning & Design......... 0 40,000 40,000
Locations
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Worldwide Various Submarine Payloads 0 1,400 1,400
Locations Integration Laboratory
P&D (Naval Station
Newport).
Navy Worldwide Unspecified Worldwide Various Unspecified Minor 0 75,000 75,000
Locations Construction.
SUBTOTAL NAVY 2,368,352 1,336,050 3,704,402
....................... ......................
AIR FORCE
Air Force Alaska Eielson Air Force Base Contaminated Soil Removal. 0 44,850 44,850
Air Force Alaska Joint Base Elmendorf- Extend Runway 16/34 (INC 79,000 79,000
Richardson 1).
Air Force Arizona Davis-Monthan Air South Wilmot Gate......... 13,400 13,400
Force Base
Air Force Arizona Luke Air Force Base F-35A ADAL AMU Facility 28,000 28,000
Squadron #6.
Air Force Arizona Luke Air Force Base F-35A Squadron Operations 21,000 21,000
Facility #6.
Air Force Australia Royal Australian Air Squadron Operations 7,400 7,400
Force Base Darwin Facility.
Air Force Australia Royal Australian Air Aircraft Maintenance 6,200 6,200
Force Base Tindal Support Facility.
Air Force Australia Royal Australian Air Squadron Operations 8,200 8,200
Force Base Tindal Facility.
Air Force California Edwards Air Force Base Flight Test Engineering 4,000 4,000
Lab Complex.
Air Force California Vandenberg Space Force GBSD Stage Processing 19,000 19,000
Base Facility.
Air Force California Vandenberg Space Force GBSD Re-Entry Vehicle 48,000 48,000
Base Facility.
Air Force Colorado Schriever Space Force ADAL Fitness Center....... 0 30,000 30,000
Base
Air Force District of Columbia Joint Base Anacostia Joint Air Defense 24,000 24,000
Bolling Operations Center Phase
II.
Air Force Florida Eglin Air Force Base Cost to Complete--Advanced 0 31,500 31,500
Munitions Technology
Complex.
Air Force Florida Eglin Air Force Base Flightline Fire Station at 0 14,000 14,000
Duke Field.
Air Force Georgia Moody Air Force Base 41 RQS HH-60W Apron....... 0 12,500 12,500
Air Force Germany Spangdahlem Air Base F/A-22 LO/Composite Repair 22,625 22,625
Facility.
Air Force Guam Joint Region Marianas Munitions Storage Igloos 55,000 55,000
IV.
Air Force Guam Joint Region Marianas Airfield Damage Repair 30,000 30,000
Warehouse.
Air Force Guam Joint Region Marianas Hayman Munitions Storage 9,824 9,824
Igloos, MSA2.
Air Force Hungary Kecskemet Air Base EDI: Construct Parallel 38,650 38,650
Taxiway.
Air Force Hungary Kecskemet Air Base EDI: Construct Airfield 20,564 20,564
Upgrades.
Air Force Italy Aviano Air Force Base Area A1 Entry Control 0 10,200 10,200
Point.
Air Force Japan Kadena Air Base Airfield Damage Repair 38,000 38,000
Storage Facility.
Air Force Japan Kadena Air Base Helicopter Rescue Ops 168,000 -118,000 50,000
Maintenance Hangar.
Air Force Japan Kadena Air Base Replace Munitions 26,100 26,100
Structures.
Air Force Japan Misawa Air Base Airfield Damage Repair 25,000 25,000
Facility.
Air Force Japan Yokota Air Base Airfield Damage Repair 0 39,000 39,000
Warehouse.
Air Force Japan Yokota Air Base Construct CATM Facility... 25,000 25,000
Air Force Japan Yokota Air Base C-130J Corrosion Control 67,000 67,000
Hangar.
Air Force Louisiana Barksdale Air Force Cost to Complete--Entrance 0 36,000 36,000
Base Road and Gate.
Air Force Louisiana Barksdale Air Force Weapons Generation 40,000 40,000
Base Facility (INC 1).
Air Force Maryland Joint Base Andrews Cost to Complete--Military 0 7,800 7,800
Working Dog Kennel.
Air Force Maryland Joint Base Andrews Fire Crash Rescue Station. 26,000 26,000
Air Force Massachusetts Hanscom Air Force Base NC3 Acquisitions 66,000 66,000
Management Facility.
Air Force New Mexico Kirtland Air Force Cost to Complete--Wyoming 0 5,600 5,600
Base Gate Antiterrorism
Compliance.
Air Force Ohio Wright-Patterson Air Child Development Center.. 0 24,000 24,000
Force Base
Air Force Oklahoma Tinker Air Force Base KC-46A 3-Bay Depot 160,000 -100,000 60,000
Maintenance Hangar.
Air Force South Carolina Joint Base Charleston Fire and Rescue Station... 0 30,000 30,000
Air Force South Carolina Joint Base Charleston Flightline Support 0 29,000 29,000
Facility.
Air Force South Dakota Ellsworth Air Force B-21 2-Bay LO Restoration 91,000 -50,000 41,000
Base Facility (INC 2).
Air Force South Dakota Ellsworth Air Force B-21 Field Training 47,000 47,000
Base Detachment Facility.
Air Force South Dakota Ellsworth Air Force B-21 Mission Operations 36,000 36,000
Base Planning Facility.
Air Force South Dakota Ellsworth Air Force B-21 Washrack & 65,000 65,000
Base Maintenance Hangar.
Air Force South Dakota Ellsworth Air Force B-21 ADAL Flight Simulator 24,000 24,000
Base
Air Force South Dakota Ellsworth Air Force B-21 Formal Training Unit/ 70,000 70,000
Base AMU.
Air Force Spain Moron Air Base EDI: Hot Cargo Pad........ 8,542 8,542
Air Force Tennessee Arnold Air Force Base Add/Alter Test Cell 0 14,600 14,600
Delivery Bay.
Air Force Texas Joint Base San Antonio BMT Recruit Dormitory 8 31,000 31,000
(INC 3).
Air Force Texas Joint Base San Antonio BMT Recruit Dormitory 7... 141,000 141,000
Air Force Texas Joint Base San Child Development Center - 0 29,000 29,000
Antonio--Fort Sam FSH.
Houston
Air Force Texas Joint Base San Child Development Center - 0 29,000 29,000
Antonio--Lackland Lackland.
Air Force Texas Sheppard Air Force Child Development Center.. 20,000 20,000
Base
Air Force United Kingdom Royal Air Force EDI: Construct DABS-FEV 94,000 -70,000 24,000
Fairford Storage.
Air Force United Kingdom Royal Air Force Cost to Complete--F-35 0 4,400 4,400
Lakenheath ADAL Conventional
Munitions MX.
Air Force United Kingdom Royal Air Force F-35A Child Development 0 24,000 24,000
Lakenheath Center.
Air Force United Kingdom Royal Air Force F-35A Weapons Load 49,000 49,000
Lakenheath Training Facility.
Air Force United Kingdom Royal Air Force F-35A Munition Inspection 31,000 31,000
Lakenheath Facility.
Air Force Utah Hill Air Force Base GBSD Organic Software 31,000 31,000
Sustainment Center (INC
2).
Air Force Virginia Joint Base Langley Fuel System Maintenance 0 24,000 24,000
Eustis Dock.
Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Various Worldwide EDI: Planning & Design.... 648 648
Locations
Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Various Worldwide PDI: Planning & Design.... 27,200 27,200
Locations
Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Various Worldwide Planning & Design......... 201,453 201,453
Locations
Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Various Worldwide Unspecified Minor Military 58,884 58,884
Locations Construction.
Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Worldwide Various Lab Planning & Design 0 120,000 120,000
Locations Unfunded Requirement.
Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Worldwide Various Secure Integration Support 0 8,800 8,800
Locations Lab w/Land Acquisition
P&D (Air Force Maui
Optical and
Supercomputing Site).
SUBTOTAL AIR FORCE 2,102,690 230,250 2,332,940
....................... ......................
DEFENSE-WIDE
Defense-Wide Alabama Fort Rucker 10 MW RICE Generator Plant 0 24,000 24,000
and Microgrid Controls.
Defense-Wide Alabama Redstone Arsenal MSIC Advanced Analysis 0 25,000 25,000
Facility Phase 1 (INC).
Defense-Wide Belgium Chievres Air Base Europe West District 15,000 15,000
Superintendent's Office.
Defense-Wide California Camp Pendleton Veterinary Treatment 13,600 13,600
Facility Replacement.
Defense-Wide California Marine Corps Air Additional LFG Power Meter 0 4,054 4,054
Station Miramar Station.
Defense-Wide California Naval Air Weapons Solar Energy Storage 0 9,120 9,120
Station China Lake / System.
Ridgecrest
Defense-Wide California Silver Strand Training SOF NSWG11 Operations 12,000 12,000
Complex Support Facility.
Defense-Wide California Silver Strand Training SOF ATC Operations Support 21,700 21,700
Complex Facility.
Defense-Wide Colorado Buckley Air Force Base JCC Expansion............. 20,000 20,000
Defense-Wide District of Columbia Joint Base Anacostia DIA HQ Cooling Towers and 0 2,257 2,257
Bolling Cond Pumps.
Defense-Wide District of Columbia Joint Base Anacostia PV Carports............... 0 29,004 29,004
Bolling
Defense-Wide Florida MacDill Air Force Base Transmission and Switching 0 22,000 22,000
Stations.
Defense-Wide Georgia Fort Benning 4.8MW Generation and 0 17,593 17,593
Microgrid.
Defense-Wide Georgia Fort Benning SOF Battalion Headquarters 62,000 62,000
Facility.
Defense-Wide Georgia Fort Stewart 10 MW Generation Plant, 0 22,000 22,000
with Microgrid Controls.
Defense-Wide Georgia Naval Submarine Base Electrical Transmission 0 19,314 19,314
Kings Bay and Distribution.
Defense-Wide Germany Ramstein Air Base Ramstein Middle School.... 93,000 -80,000 13,000
Defense-Wide Guam Polaris Point Inner Apra Harbor 0 38,300 38,300
Submarine Base Resiliency Upgrades
(Phase I).
Defense-Wide Hawaii Joint Base Pearl Veterinary Treatment 29,800 29,800
Harbor-Hickam Facility Replacement.
Defense-Wide Idaho Mountain Home Air Water Treatment Plant and 0 33,800 33,800
Force Base Pump Station.
Defense-Wide Japan Kadena Air Base Truck Unload Facilities... 22,300 22,300
Defense-Wide Japan Kadena Air Base Operations Support 24,000 24,000
Facility.
Defense-Wide Japan Marine Corps Air Base Fuel Pier................. 57,700 57,700
Iwakuni
Defense-Wide Japan Misawa Air Base Additive Injection Pump 6,000 6,000
and Storage System.
Defense-Wide Japan Naval Air Facility Smart Grid for Utility and 0 3,810 3,810
Atsugi Facility Controls.
Defense-Wide Japan Yokota Air Base Hangar/AMU................ 108,253 -78,000 30,253
Defense-Wide Kuwait Camp Arifjan Microgrid Controller, 1.25 0 15,000 15,000
MW Solar PV, and 1.5 MWh
Battery.
Defense-Wide Maryland Bethesda Naval MEDCEN Addition / 153,233 153,233
Hospital Alteration (INC 5).
Defense-Wide Maryland Fort Meade SOF Operations Facility... 100,000 -25,000 75,000
Defense-Wide Maryland Fort Meade NSAW Recap Building 4 (INC 104,100 104,100
1).
Defense-Wide Maryland Fort Meade NSAW Mission Ops and 94,000 94,000
Records Center (INC 1).
Defense-Wide Michigan Camp Grayling 650 kW Gas-Fired Micro- 0 5,700 5,700
Turbine Generation System.
Defense-Wide Mississippi Camp Shelby 10 MW Generation Plant and 0 34,500 34,500
Feeder Level Microgrid
system.
Defense-Wide Mississippi Camp Shelby Electrical Distribution 0 11,155 11,155
Infrastructure
Undergrounding Hardening
Project.
Defense-Wide Missouri Fort Leonard Wood Hospital Replacement (INC 160,000 160,000
4).
Defense-Wide New Mexico Kirtland Air Force Environmental Health 8,600 8,600
Base Facility Replacement.
Defense-Wide New York Fort Drum Well Field Expansion 0 25,300 25,300
Project.
Defense-Wide North Carolina Fort Bragg 10 MW Microgrid Utilizing 0 19,464 19,464
Existing and New
Generators.
Defense-Wide North Carolina Fort Bragg Emergency Water System.... 0 7,705 7,705
Defense-Wide North Dakota Cavalier Air Force PCARS Emergency Power 0 24,150 24,150
Station Plant Fuel Storage.
Defense-Wide Ohio Springfield-Beckley Base-wide Microgrid with 0 4,700 4,700
Municipal Airport Natural Gas Generator,
Photovoltaic and Battery
Storage.
Defense-Wide Puerto Rico Aguadilla Microgrid Control System, 0 10,120 10,120
460 kW PV, 275 kW
Generator, 660 kWh BESS.
Defense-Wide Puerto Rico Fort Allen Microgrid Control System, 0 12,190 12,190
690 kW PV, 275 kW GEN,
570 kWh BESS.
Defense-Wide Puerto Rico Punta Borinquen Ramey Unit School 84,000 84,000
Replacement.
Defense-Wide Tennessee Memphis International PV Arrays and Battery 0 4,780 4,780
Airport Storage.
Defense-Wide Texas Joint Base San Antonio Ambulatory Care Center 35,000 35,000
Phase 4.
Defense-Wide United Kingdom Menwith Hill Station RAFMH Main Gate 20,000 20,000
Rehabilitation.
Defense-Wide United Kingdom Royal Air Force Hospital Replacement- 19,283 19,283
Lakenheath Temporary Facilities.
Defense-Wide Virginia Fort Belvoir Veterinary Treatment 29,800 29,800
Facility Replacement.
Defense-Wide Virginia Fort Belvoir, NGA LED Upgrade Package....... 0 365 365
Campus East
Defense-Wide Virginia Humphries Engineer SOF Battalion Operations 0 36,000 36,000
Center and Support Facility.
Activity
Defense-Wide Virginia National Geospatial- Electrical System 0 5,299 5,299
Intelligence Agency Redundancy.
Campus East
Defense-Wide Virginia Pentagon Consolidated Maintenance 20,000 20,000
Complex (RRMC).
Defense-Wide Virginia Pentagon Force Protection Perimeter 8,608 8,608
Enhancements.
Defense-Wide Virginia Pentagon Public Works Support 21,935 21,935
Facility.
Defense-Wide Virginia Pentagon, Mark Center, Recommissioning of HVAC 0 2,600 2,600
and Raven Rock Systems, Part B.
Mountain Complex
Defense-Wide Washington Oak Harbor ACC / Dental Clinic....... 59,000 59,000
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor Military 8,000 8,000
Locations Construction.
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 13,317 13,317
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 11,000 11,000
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor Military 4,435 4,435
Locations Construction.
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor Military 21,746 21,746
Locations Construction.
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Energy Resilience and 246,600 -246,600 0
Locations Conserv. Invest. Prog..
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor Military 3,000 3,000
Locations Construction.
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 14,194 14,194
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide ERCIP Design.............. 40,150 40,150
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor Military 12,000 12,000
Locations Construction.
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 83,840 83,840
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Exercise Related Minor 5,615 5,615
Locations Construction.
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 2,000 2,000
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 5,275 5,275
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Various Worldwide Planning & Design......... 20,576 20,576
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Various Worldwide Planning & Design......... 20,862 20,862
Locations
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Various Worldwide Unspecified Minor Military 6,668 6,668
Locations Construction.
Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Various Worldwide Planning & Design......... 35,099 35,099
Locations
SUBTOTAL DEFENSE-WIDE 1,957,289 39,680 1,996,969
....................... ......................
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD
Army National Guard Alabama Huntsville National Guard Readiness 0 17,000 17,000
Center.
Army National Guard Connecticut Putnam National Guard Readiness 17,500 17,500
Center.
Army National Guard Georgia Fort Benning Post-Initial Mil. Training 13,200 13,200
Unaccomp. Housing.
Army National Guard Guam Barrigada National Guard Readiness 34,000 34,000
Center Addition.
Army National Guard Idaho Jerome National Guard Readiness 15,000 15,000
Center.
Army National Guard Illinois Bloomington Armory National Guard Vehicle 15,000 15,000
Maintenance Shop.
Army National Guard Kansas Topeka National Guard/Reserve 16,732 16,732
Center Building.
Army National Guard Louisiana Lake Charles National Guard Readiness 18,500 18,500
Center.
Army National Guard Maine Saco National Guard Vehicle 21,200 21,200
Maintenance Shop.
Army National Guard Mississippi Camp Shelby Maneuver Area Training 0 15,500 15,500
Equipment Site.
Army National Guard Montana Butte National Guard Readiness 16,000 16,000
Center.
Army National Guard Nebraska Mead Training Site Collective Training 0 11,000 11,000
Unaccompanied Housing.
Army National Guard North Dakota Dickinson National Guard Readiness 15,500 15,500
Center.
Army National Guard South Dakota Sioux Falls National Guard Readiness 0 15,000 15,000
Center.
Army National Guard Texas Camp Bullis Cost to Complete, Vehicle 0 16,400 16,400
Maintenance Shop.
Army National Guard Vermont Bennington National Guard Readiness 0 16,900 16,900
Center.
Army National Guard Virginia Troutville National Guard Readiness 6,100 6,100
Center Addition.
Army National Guard Virginia Troutville Combined Support 6,900 6,900
Maintenance Shop Addition.
Army National Guard Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor Military 39,471 39,471
Locations Construction.
Army National Guard Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 22,000 22,000
Locations
Army National Guard Worldwide Unspecified Worldwide Various Army Aviation Support 0 6,500 6,500
Locations Facility P&D (Sandston,
VA).
Army National Guard Worldwide Unspecified Worldwide Various Cost to Complete, 0 69,000 69,000
Locations Unspecified Minor
Construction.
Army National Guard Worldwide Unspecified Worldwide Various Family Housing Planning 0 15,000 15,000
Locations and Design.
SUBTOTAL ARMY NATIONAL GUARD 257,103 182,300 439,403
....................... ......................
AIR NATIONAL GUARD
Air National Guard Alabama Montgomery Regional Aircraft Maintenance 0 19,200 19,200
Airport Facility.
Air National Guard Alabama Sumpter Smith Air Security and Services 0 7,500 7,500
National Guard Base Training Facility.
Air National Guard Connecticut Bradley International Composite ASE/Vehicle Mx 0 17,000 17,000
Airport Facility.
Air National Guard Delaware New Castle County Replace Fuel Cell/ 0 17,500 17,500
Airport Corrosion Control Hangar.
Air National Guard Idaho Boise Air Terminal Medical Training Facility. 0 6,500 6,500
(Gowen Field)
Air National Guard Illinois Abraham Lincoln Base Civil Engineer 0 10,200 10,200
Capital Airport Complex.
Air National Guard Massachusetts Barnes Air National Combined Engine/ASE/NDI 12,200 12,200
Guard Base Shop.
Air National Guard Michigan Alpena County Regional Aircraft Maintenance 23,000 23,000
Airport Hangar/Shops.
Air National Guard Michigan Selfridge Air National A-10 Maintenance Hangar 0 28,000 28,000
Guard Base and Shops.
Air National Guard Michigan W. K. Kellog Regional Construct Main Base 10,000 10,000
Airport Entrance.
Air National Guard Mississippi Jackson International Fire Crash and Rescue 9,300 9,300
Airport Station.
Air National Guard New York Francis S. Gabreski Base Civil Engineer 0 14,800 14,800
Airport Complex.
Air National Guard New York Schenectady Municipal C-130 Flight Simulator 10,800 10,800
Airport Facility.
Air National Guard Ohio Camp Perry RED HORSE Logistics 7,800 7,800
Complex.
Air National Guard South Carolina McEntire Joint Hazardous Cargo Pad....... 0 9,000 9,000
National Guard Base
Air National Guard South Carolina McEntire Joint F-16 Mission Training 9,800 9,800
National Guard Base Center.
Air National Guard South Dakota Joe Foss Field F-16 Mission Training 9,800 9,800
Center.
Air National Guard Texas Kelly Field Annex Aircraft Corrosion Control 0 9,500 9,500
Air National Guard Washington Camp Murray Air Air Support Operations 0 27,000 27,000
National Guard Complex.
Station
Air National Guard Wisconsin Truax Field Medical Readiness Facility 13,200 13,200
Air National Guard Wisconsin Truax Field F-35 3-Bay Specialized 31,000 31,000
Hangar.
Air National Guard Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor Military 29,068 29,068
Locations Construction.
Air National Guard Worldwide Unspecified Various Worldwide Planning & Design......... 34,402 34,402
Locations
Air National Guard Wyoming Cheyenne Regional Combined Vehicle 13,400 13,400
Airport Maintenance & ASE Complex.
SUBTOTAL AIR NATIONAL GUARD 213,770 166,200 379,970
....................... ......................
ARMY RESERVE
Army Reserve Michigan Southfield Area Maintenance Support 12,000 12,000
Activity.
Army Reserve Ohio Wright-Patterson Air AR Center Training 19,000 19,000
Force Base Building/ UHS.
Army Reserve Wisconsin Fort McCoy Transient Training Officer 0 29,200 29,200
Barracks.
Army Reserve Wisconsin Fort McCoy Transient Training 12,200 12,200
Battalion Headquarters.
Army Reserve Wisonsin Fort McCoy Transient Training 0 29,200 29,200
Enlisted Barracks.
Army Reserve Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 7,167 7,167
Locations
Army Reserve Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor Military 14,544 14,544
Locations Construction.
SUBTOTAL ARMY RESERVE 64,911 58,400 123,311
....................... ......................
NAVY RESERVE
Navy Reserve Michigan Navy Operational Reserve Center & Vehicle 49,090 49,090
Support Center Battle Maintenance Facility.
Creek
Navy Reserve Minnesota Minneapolis Air Joint Reserve Intelligence 14,350 14,350
Reserve Station Center.
Navy Reserve Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide MCNR Unspecified Minor 2,359 2,359
Locations Construction.
Navy Reserve Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide USMCR Planning and Design. 4,748 4,748
Locations
Navy Reserve Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide MCNR Planning & Design.... 1,257 1,257
Locations
SUBTOTAL NAVY RESERVE 71,804 0 71,804
....................... ......................
AIR FORCE RESERVE
Air Force Reserve California Beale Air Force Base 940 ARW SQ OPS & AMU 0 33,000 33,000
Complex.
Air Force Reserve Florida Homestead Air Reserve Corrosion Control Facility 14,000 14,000
Base
Air Force Reserve Florida Patrick Air Force Base Recovery Flight Simulator. 18,500 18,500
Air Force Reserve Indiana Grissom Air Reserve Logistics Readiness 0 29,000 29,000
Base Complex.
Air Force Reserve Minnesota Minneapolis-St Paul Mission Support Group 14,000 14,000
Air Reserve Station Facility.
Air Force Reserve New York Niagara Falls Air Main Gate................. 10,600 10,600
Reserve Station
Air Force Reserve Ohio Youngstown Air Reserve Assault Runway............ 0 8,700 8,700
Base
Air Force Reserve Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 5,830 5,830
Locations
Air Force Reserve Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor Military 15,444 15,444
Locations Construction.
Air Force Reserve Worldwide Unspecified Worldwide Various Planning and Design - KC- 0 15,000 15,000
Locations 46 MOB 5.
SUBTOTAL AIR FORCE RESERVE 78,374 85,700 164,074
....................... ......................
NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM
NATO Security Investment Worldwide Unspecified NATO Security NATO Security Investment 205,853 205,853
Program Investment Program Program.
SUBTOTAL NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM 205,853 0 205,853
....................... ......................
TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION 8,154,838 2,851,580 11,006,418
....................... ......................
FAMILY HOUSING
CONSTRUCTION, ARMY
Construction, Army Italy Vicenza Family Housing New 92,304 92,304
Construction.
Construction, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Family Housing P&D........ 7,545 7,545
Locations
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION, ARMY 99,849 0 99,849
....................... ......................
O&M, ARMY
O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Management................ 42,850 42,850
Locations
O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Services.................. 8,277 8,277
Locations
O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Furnishings............... 18,077 18,077
Locations
O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Miscellaneous............. 556 556
Locations
O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Maintenance............... 111,181 111,181
Locations
O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Utilities................. 43,772 43,772
Locations
O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Leasing................... 128,110 128,110
Locations
O&M, Army Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Housing Privatization 38,404 38,404
Locations Support.
SUBTOTAL O&M, ARMY 391,227 0 391,227
....................... ......................
CONSTRUCTION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS
Construction, Navy and Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide USMC DPRI/Guam Planning & 2,098 2,098
Marine Corps Locations Design.
Construction, Navy and Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Construction Improvements. 71,884 71,884
Marine Corps Locations
Construction, Navy and Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 3,634 3,634
Marine Corps Locations
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS 77,616 0 77,616
....................... ......................
O&M, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS
O&M, Navy and Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Utilities................. 56,271 56,271
Locations
O&M, Navy and Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Furnishings............... 16,537 16,537
Locations
O&M, Navy and Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Management................ 54,083 54,083
Locations
O&M, Navy and Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Miscellaneous............. 285 285
Locations
O&M, Navy and Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Services.................. 17,637 17,637
Locations
O&M, Navy and Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Leasing................... 62,567 62,567
Locations
O&M, Navy and Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Maintenance............... 95,417 95,417
Locations
O&M, Navy and Marine Corps Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Housing Privatization 54,544 54,544
Locations Support.
SUBTOTAL O&M, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS 357,341 0 357,341
....................... ......................
CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE
Construction, Air Force Georgia Robins Air Force Base Robins 2 MHPI Restructure. 6,000 6,000
Construction, Air Force Nebraska Offutt Air Force Base Offutt MHPI Restructure... 50,000 50,000
Construction, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Construction Improvements. 49,258 49,258
Locations
Construction, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Planning & Design......... 10,458 10,458
Locations
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE 115,716 0 115,716
....................... ......................
O&M, AIR FORCE
O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Housing Privatization..... 23,275 23,275
Locations
O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Utilities................. 43,668 43,668
Locations
O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Management................ 70,062 70,062
Locations
O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Services.................. 8,124 8,124
Locations
O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Furnishings............... 26,842 26,842
Locations
O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Miscellaneous............. 2,200 2,200
Locations
O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Leasing................... 9,520 9,520
Locations
O&M, Air Force Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Maintenance............... 141,754 141,754
Locations
SUBTOTAL O&M, AIR FORCE 325,445 0 325,445
....................... ......................
O&M, DEFENSE-WIDE
O&M, Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Utilities................. 4,166 4,166
Locations
O&M, Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Furnishings............... 83 83
Locations
O&M, Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Utilities................. 14 14
Locations
O&M, Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Leasing................... 13,387 13,387
Locations
O&M, Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Maintenance............... 49 49
Locations
O&M, Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Furnishings............... 656 656
Locations
O&M, Defense-Wide Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Leasing................... 31,430 31,430
Locations
SUBTOTAL O&M, DEFENSE-WIDE 49,785 0 49,785
....................... ......................
IMPROVEMENT FUND
Improvement Fund Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Administrative Expenses-- 6,081 6,081
Locations FHIF.
SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 6,081 0 6,081
....................... ......................
UNACCMP HSG IMPROVEMENT FUND
Unaccmp HSG Improvement Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Administrative Expenses-- 494 494
Fund Locations UHIF.
SUBTOTAL UNACCMP HSG IMPROVEMENT FUND 494 0 494
....................... ......................
TOTAL FAMILY HOUSING 1,423,554 1,423,554
....................... ......................
DEFENSE BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
ARMY BRAC
Army BRAC Worldwide Unspecified Base Realignment & Base Realignment & Closure 65,301 65,301
Closure
SUBTOTAL ARMY BRAC 65,301 0 65,301
....................... ......................
NAVY BRAC
Navy BRAC Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Base Realignment & Closure 111,155 111,155
Locations
SUBTOTAL NAVY BRAC 111,155 0 111,155
....................... ......................
AIR FORCE BRAC
Air Force BRAC Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide DOD BRAC Activities--Air 104,216 104,216
Locations Force.
SUBTOTAL AIR FORCE BRAC 104,216 0 104,216
....................... ......................
DOD BRAC
DOD BRAC Worldwide Unspecified Unspecified Worldwide Int-4: DLA Activities..... 3,967 3,967
Locations
SUBTOTAL DOD BRAC 3,967 0 3,967
....................... ......................
TOTAL DEFENSE BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE 284,639 284,639
....................... ......................
TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, FAMILY HOUSING, AND BRAC 9,863,031 2,851,580 12,714,611
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE XLVII--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS
TITLE XLVII--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL
SECURITY PROGRAMS
SEC. 4701. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 4701. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate
Program FY 2022 Request Senate Change Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discretionary Summary by Appropriation
Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
Appropriation Summary:
Energy Programs
Nuclear energy...................................... 149,800 0 149,800
Atomic Energy Defense Activities
National Nuclear Security Administration:
Federal Salaries and Expenses..................... 464,000 0 464,000
Weapons activities................................ 15,484,295 271,450 15,755,745
Defense nuclear nonproliferation.................. 1,934,000 57,000 1,991,000
Naval reactors.................................... 1,860,705 0 1,860,705
Total, National Nuclear Security Administration..... 19,743,000 328,450 20,071,450
Defense environmental cleanup....................... 6,841,670 -268,670 6,573,000
Other defense activities............................ 1,170,000 -250,000 920,000
Total, Atomic Energy Defense Activities............... 27,754,670 -190,220 27,564,450
Total, Discretionary Funding.............................. 27,904,470 -190,220 27,714,250
Nuclear Energy
Safeguards and security................................. 149,800 149,800
Total, Nuclear Energy..................................... 149,800 0 149,800
National Nuclear Security Administration
Federal Salaries and Expenses
Program direction....................................... 464,000 0 464,000
Weapons Activities
Stockpile management
Stockpile major modernization
B61 Life extension program.......................... 771,664 771,664
W76-2 Modification program.......................... 0 0
W88 Alteration program.............................. 207,157 207,157
W80-4 Life extension program........................ 1,080,400 1,080,400
W80-4 ALT SLCM...................................... 10,000 10,000
W87-1 Modification Program (formerly IW1)........... 691,031 691,031
W93................................................. 72,000 72,000
Multi-Weapon Systems................................ 1,180,483 1,180,483
Total, Stockpile major modernization.................. 4,012,735 0 4,012,735
Weapons dismantlement and disposition................. 51,000 51,000
Production operations................................. 568,941 568,941
Total, Stockpile management............................. 4,632,676 0 4,632,676
Production modernization
Primary capability modernization
Plutonium modernization
Los Alamos plutonium modernization
Los Alamos Plutonium Operations................. 660,419 660,419
21-D-512, Plutonium Pit Production Project, LANL 350,000 350,000
Subtotal, Los Alamos plutonium modernization...... 1,010,419 0 1,010,419
Savannah River plutonium modernization
Savannah River plutonium operations............. 128,000 128,000
21-D-511, Savannah River Plutonium Processing 475,000 475,000
Facility, SRS..................................
Subtotal, Savannah River plutonium modernization.. 603,000 0 603,000
Enterprise Plutonium Support...................... 107,098 107,098
Total, Plutonium Modernization...................... 1,720,517 0 1,720,517
High Explosives & Energetics........................ 68,785 68,785
Total, Primary capability modernization............... 1,789,302 0 1,789,302
Secondary Capability Modernization.................... 488,097 5,000 493,097
Cold hearth furnace for depleted uranium..... (5,000)
Tritium and Domestic Uranium Enrichment............... 489,017 489,017
Non-Nuclear Capability Modernization.................. 144,563 144,563
Total, Production modernization......................... 2,910,979 5,000 2,915,979
Stockpile research, technology, and engineering
Assessment science.................................... 689,578 79,950 769,528
Reverse FY22 decrease........................ (79,950)
Engineering and integrated assessments................ 336,766 1,000 337,766
Reverse FY22 decrease........................ (1,000)
Inertial confinement fusion........................... 529,000 70,000 599,000
Reverse FY22 decrease, fund operations and (70,000)
targets......................................
Advanced simulation and computing..................... 747,012 747,012
Weapon technology and manufacturing maturation........ 292,630 8,500 301,130
Reverse FY22 decrease........................ (8,500)
Academic programs..................................... 85,645 6,300 91,945
Reverse FY22 decrease........................ (6,300)
Total, Stockpile research, technology, and engineering.. 2,680,631 165,750 2,846,381
Infrastructure and operations
Operating
Operations of facilities............................ 1,014,000 1,014,000
Safety and Environmental Operations................. 165,354 165,354
Maintenance and Repair of Facilities................ 670,000 670,000
Recapitalization
Infrastructure and Safety......................... 508,664 66,000 574,664
Reverse FY22 decrease........................ (66,000)
Capabilities Based Investments.................... 143,066 6,100 149,166
Reverse FY22 decrease........................ (6,100)
Planning for Programmatic Construction (Pre-CD-1). 0 10,000 10,000
Reverse FY22 decrease........................ (10,000)
Subtotal, Recapitalization.......................... 651,730 82,100 733,830
Total, Operating...................................... 2,501,084 82,100 2,583,184
I&O: Construction
Programmatic
22-D-513 Power Sources Capability, SNL........... 13,827 13,827
21-D-510, HE Synthesis, Formulation, and 44,500 44,500
Production Facility, PX..........................
18-D-690, Lithium Processing Facility, Y-12....... 171,902 171,902
18-D-650, Tritium Finishing Facility, SRS......... 27,000 27,000
18-D-620, Exascale Computing Facility 0 0
Modernization Project, LLNL......................
17-D-640, U1a Complex Enhancements Project, NNSS.. 135,000 135,000
15-D-302, TA-55 Reinvestment Project--Phase 3, 27,000 27,000
LANL.............................................
15-D-301, HE Science & Engineering Facility, PX... 0 0
07-D-220-04, Transuranic Liquid Waste Facility, 0 0
LANL.............................................
06-D-141, Uranium Processing Facility, Y-12....... 524,000 524,000
04-D-125, Chemistry and Metallurgy Research 138,123 138,123
Replacement Project, LANL........................
Total, Programmatic................................. 1,081,352 0 1,081,352
Mission enabling
22-D-514 Digital Infrastructure Capability 8,000 8,000
Expansion........................................
Total, Mission enabling............................. 8,000 0 8,000
Total, I&O construction............................... 1,089,352 0 1,089,352
Total, Infrastructure and operations.................... 3,590,436 82,100 3,672,536
Secure transportation asset
Operations and equipment.............................. 213,704 12,000 225,704
Reverse FY22 decrease........................ (12,000)
Program direction..................................... 123,060 6,600 129,660
Reverse FY22 decrease........................ (6,600)
Total, Secure transportation asset...................... 336,764 18,600 355,364
Defense nuclear security
Operations and maintenance............................ 824,623 824,623
Security improvements program......................... 0 0
Construction:
17-D-710, West end protected area reduction project, 23,000 23,000
Y-12...............................................
Subtotal, construction................................ 23,000 0 23,000
Total, Defense nuclear security......................... 847,623 0 847,623
Information technology and cybersecurity................ 406,530 406,530
Legacy contractor pensions.............................. 78,656 78,656
Total, Weapons Activities................................. 15,484,295 271,450 15,755,745
Adjustments
Use of prior year balances............................ 0 0
Total, Adjustments...................................... 0 0 0
Total, Weapons Activities................................. 15,484,295 271,450 15,755,745
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Programs
Material management and minimization
Conversion (formerly HEU Reactor Conversion)........ 100,660 100,660
Nuclear material removal............................ 42,100 42,100
Material disposition................................ 200,186 200,186
Laboratory and partnership support.................. 0 10,000 10,000
Additional isotope production.................. (10,000)
Total, Material management & minimization............. 342,946 10,000 352,946
Global material security
International nuclear security...................... 79,939 79,939
Domestic radiological security...................... 158,002 27,000 185,002
Reverse FY22 decrease.......................... (27,000)
International radiological security................. 85,000 85,000
Nuclear smuggling detection and deterrence.......... 175,000 10,000 185,000
Additional border screening.................... (10,000)
Total, Global material security....................... 497,941 37,000 534,941
Nonproliferation and arms control..................... 184,795 184,795
National Technical Nuclear Forensics R&D.............. 45,000 45,000
Defense nuclear nonproliferation R&D
Proliferation detection............................. 269,407 269,407
Nonproliferation Stewardship program.............. 87,329 87,329
Nuclear detonation detection........................ 271,000 271,000
Nonproliferation fuels development.................. 0 0
Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation R&D........... 627,736 0 627,736
Nonproliferation construction
U.S. Construction:
18-D-150 Surplus Plutonium Disposition Project.... 156,000 156,000
99-D-143, Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication 0 0
Facility, SRS....................................
Total, U.S. Construction:........................... 156,000 0 156,000
Total, Nonproliferation construction.................. 156,000 0 156,000
Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Programs........ 1,854,418 47,000 1,901,418
Legacy contractor pensions.............................. 38,800 38,800
Nuclear counterterrorism and incident response program
Emergency Operations.................................. 14,597 10,000 24,597
Reverse FY22 decrease........................ (10,000)
Counterterrorism and Counterproliferation............. 356,185 356,185
Total, Nuclear counterterrorism and incident response 370,782 10,000 380,782
program................................................
Subtotal, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation................ 2,264,000 57,000 2,321,000
Adjustments
Use of prior year balances............................ 0 0
Rescission of prior year MOX funding.................. -330,000 -330,000
Total, Adjustments...................................... -330,000 0 -330,000
Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation................... 1,934,000 57,000 1,991,000
Naval Reactors
Naval reactors development.............................. 635,684 635,684
Columbia-Class reactor systems development.............. 55,000 55,000
S8G Prototype refueling................................. 126,000 126,000
Naval reactors operations and infrastructure............ 599,017 599,017
Program direction....................................... 55,579 55,579
Construction:
22-D-532 Security Upgrades KL......................... 5,100 5,100
22-D-531 KL Chemistry & Radiological Health Building.. 41,620 41,620
21-D-530 KL Steam and Condensate Upgrades............. 0 0
14-D-901, Spent Fuel Handling Recapitalization 348,705 348,705
Project, NRF.........................................
Total, Construction..................................... 395,425 0 395,425
Rescission of Prior Year unobligated balances........... -6,000 -6,000
Total, Naval Reactors..................................... 1,860,705 0 1,860,705
TOTAL, National Nuclear Security Administration........... 19,743,000 328,450 20,071,450
Defense Environmental Cleanup
Closure sites administration.......................... 3,987 3,987
Richland:
River corridor and other cleanup operations........... 196,000 37,000 233,000
Reverse FY22 decrease........................ (37,000)
Central plateau remediation........................... 689,776 689,776
Richland community and regulatory support............. 5,121 5,121
18-D-404 Modification of Waste Encapsulation and 8,000 8,000
Storage Facility.....................................
22-D-401 L-888, 400 Area Fire Station................. 15,200 15,200
22-D-402 L-897, 200 Area Water Treatment Facility..... 12,800 12,800
Total, Richland......................................... 926,897 37,000 963,897
Office of River Protection:
Waste Treatment Immobilization Plant Commissioning.... 50,000 50,000
Rad liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition... 817,642 20,000 837,642
Additional tank stabilization................ (20,000)
Construction:
18-D-16 Waste treatment and immobilization plant-- 586,000 586,000
LBL/Direct feed LAW..............................
01-D-16 D, High-level waste facility.............. 60,000 60,000
01-D-16 E, Pretreatment Facility.................. 20,000 20,000
Total, Construction................................... 666,000 0 666,000
ORP Low-level waste offsite disposal.................. 7,000 7,000
Total, Office of River Protection....................... 1,540,642 20,000 1,560,642
Idaho National Laboratory:
Idaho cleanup and waste disposition................... 358,925 358,925
Idaho community and regulatory support................ 2,658 2,658
Construction:
22-D-403 Idaho Spent Nuclear Fuel Staging Facility 3,000 3,000
22-D-404 Addl ICDF Landfill Disposal Cell and 5,000 5,000
Evaporation Ponds Project........................
Total, Construction................................... 8,000 0 8,000
Total, Idaho National Laboratory........................ 369,583 0 369,583
NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory................ 1,806 1,806
LLNL Excess facilities D&D............................ 35,000 10,000 45,000
Accelerate cleanup........................... (10,000)
Separations Processing Research Unit.................. 15,000 15,000
Nevada Test Site...................................... 60,737 60,737
Sandia National Laboratory............................ 4,576 4,576
Los Alamos National Laboratory........................ 275,119 275,119
Los Alamos Excess facilities D&D...................... 58,381 58,381
Total, NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites.................. 450,619 10,000 460,619
Oak Ridge Reservation:
OR Nuclear facility D&D............................... 274,923 50,000 324,923
Accelerate cleanup........................... (50,000)
U233 Disposition Program.............................. 55,000 55,000
OR cleanup and waste disposition...................... 73,725 73,725
Construction:
17-D-401 On-site waste disposal facility............ 12,500 12,500
14-D-403 Outfall 200 Mercury Treatment Facility..... 0 0
Subtotal, Construction:............................... 12,500 0 12,500
OR community & regulatory support..................... 5,096 5,096
OR technology development and deployment.............. 3,000 3,000
Total, Oak Ridge Reservation............................ 424,244 50,000 474,244
Savannah River Site:
Savannah River risk management operations............. 461,723 24,300 486,023
H-canyon operations.......................... (24,300)
SR legacy pensions.................................... 130,882 130,882
SR community and regulatory support................... 5,805 5,700 11,505
Reverse FY22 decrease........................ (5,700)
Radioactive liquid tank waste:
Construction:
20-D-402 Advanced Manufacturing Collaborative 0 0
Facility (AMC).....................................
20-D-401 Saltstone Disposal Unit #10, 11, 12........ 19,500 19,500
19-D-701 SR Security systems replacement............ 5,000 5,000
18-D-402 Saltstone disposal unit #8/9............... 68,000 68,000
17-D-402 Saltstone Disposal Unit #7................. 0 0
05-D-405 Salt waste processing facility, SRS........ 0 0
Total, Construction, Radioactive liquid tank waste.... 92,500 0 92,500
Radioactive liquid tank waste stabilization........... 890,865 890,865
Total, Savannah River Site.............................. 1,581,775 30,000 1,611,775
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant........................... 350,424 350,424
Construction:
15-D-411 Safety significant confinement ventilation 55,000 55,000
system, WIPP.......................................
15-D-412 Exhaust shaft, WIPP........................ 25,000 25,000
21-D-401 Hoisting Capability Project................ 0 0
Total, Construction................................... 80,000 0 80,000
Total, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant...................... 430,424 0 430,424
Program direction--Defense Environmental Cleanup........ 293,106 293,106
Program support--Defense Environmental Cleanup.......... 62,979 62,979
Safeguards and Security--Defense Environmental Cleanup.. 316,744 316,744
Technology development and deployment................... 25,000 25,000
Federal contribution to the Uranium Enrichment D&D Fund. 415,670 -415,670 0
Reverse contribution to Fund from EM budget.... (-415,670)
Use of prior year balances.............................. 0 0
Subtotal, Defense environmental cleanup................... 6,841,670 -268,670 6,573,000
Rescission:
Rescission of prior year balances..................... 0 0
TOTAL, Defense Environmental Cleanup...................... 6,841,670 -268,670 6,573,000
Other Defense Activities
Environment, health, safety and security
Environment, health, safety and security mission 130,809 130,809
support..............................................
Program direction..................................... 75,511 75,511
Total, Environment, health, safety and security......... 206,320 0 206,320
Independent enterprise assessments
Enterprise assessments................................ 27,335 27,335
Program direction--Office of Enterprise Assessments... 56,049 0 56,049
Total, Office of Enterprise Assessments................. 83,384 0 83,384
Specialized security activities......................... 283,500 283,500
Office of Legacy Management
Legacy management activities--defense................. 408,797 -250,000 158,797
Reduction for work performed by Army Corps of (-250,000)
Engineers....................................
Program direction..................................... 19,933 19,933
Total, Office of Legacy Management...................... 428,730 -250,000 178,730
Defense related administrative support.................. 163,710 163,710
Office of hearings and appeals.......................... 4,356 4,356
Subtotal, Other defense activities........................ 1,170,000 -250,000 920,000
Use of prior year balances.............................. 0 0
Total, Other Defense Activities........................... 1,170,000 -250,000 920,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS
Departmental Recommendations
Committee Action
Senate Armed Services Committee
ROLL CALL VOTES DURING COMMITTEE MARKUP OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE
AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022
In compliance with Rule XXVI 7(3)(b) of the Standing Rules
of the Senate, listed below is a tabulation of the roll call
votes.
Personnel Subcommittee:
1. MOTION: To include a provision that reform the
disposition of charges and convening of courts-martial for
certain offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice and
increase the prevention of sexual assaults and other crimes in
the military
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 5-1
In favor: Senators Inhofe, Gillibrand, Warren, Hawley, and
Tuberville
Opposed: Senator Tillis
Full Committee:
2. MOTION: To include a provision that would increase the
authorized active forces end strength for the Air Force.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 25-1
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Peters, Manchin, Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly,
Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst, Tillis,
Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Blackburn, Hawley, and Tuberville
Opposed: Senator Warren
3. MOTION: To include a provision that would require a
revised nuclear posture review.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 14-12
In favor: Senators Manchin, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer,
Cotton, Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Cramer, Scott,
Blackburn, Hawley, and Tuberville
Opposed: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Duckworth, Rosen, and
Kelly
4. MOTION: To include a provision to extend paid parental
leave.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 14-12
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Manchin, Duckworth, Rosen,
Kelly, and Ernst
Opposed: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds,
Tillis, Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Blackburn, Hawley, and
Tuberville
5. MOTION: To include a provision that would require the
Secretary concerned to pay a member in the reserve component of
an Armed Force incentive pay in the same amount as a member in
the regular component of that Armed Force.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 16-10
In favor: Senators Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono,
Kaine, Warren, Peters, Manchin, Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly, Ernst,
Sullivan, Cramer, Blackburn, and Tuberville
Opposed: Senators Reed, King, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer,
Cotton, Rounds, Tillis, Scott, and Hawley
6. MOTION: To include a provision that would improve the
Selective Service System.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 21-5
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Manchin, Duckworth, Rosen,
Kelly, Fischer, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Cramer, Scott,
Blackburn, and Tuberville
Opposed: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Cotton, Rounds, and
Hawley
7. MOTION: To include a provision to strike the provision
relating to Medal of Honor authorities.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 25-1
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Peters, Manchin, Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly,
Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst, Tillis,
Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Blackburn, Hawley, and Tuberville
Opposed: Senator Warren
8. MOTION: To include a provision to rescind each Medal of
Honor awarded for acts at Wounded Knee Creek on December 29,
1890, and for other purposes.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 7-19
In favor: Senators Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono, Warren,
Peters, Rosen, and Kelly
Opposed: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Kaine, King, Manchin,
Duckworth, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst,
Tillis, Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Blackburn, Hawley, and
Tuberville
9. MOTION: To include a provision to prohibit the promotion
of Critical Race Theory and similar theories in the Armed
Forces.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 13-13
In favor: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds,
Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Blackburn, Hawley, and
Tuberville
Opposed: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Manchin, Duckworth, Rosen,
and Kelly
10. MOTION: To include a provision that would require
Department of Defense Contractors to disclose diversity,
equity, and inclusion training materials as a condition of
working with the Department.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 14-12
In favor: Senators Manchin, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer,
Cotton, Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Cramer, Scott,
Blackburn, Hawley, and Tuberville
Opposed: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Duckworth, Rosen, and
Kelly
11. MOTION: To include a provision to require the Secretary
of Defense to establish a system for tracking, recording, and
reporting separations of members of the Armed Forces for
engaging in supremacist or extremist conduct.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 11-15
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Duckworth, and Rosen
Opposed: Senators Manchin, Kelly, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer,
Cotton, Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Cramer, Scott,
Blackburn, Hawley, and Tuberville
12. MOTION: To include a provision that would strike the
requirement for a report with recommendations on establishing a
punitive article in the Uniform Code of Military Justice for
violent extremism.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 12-14
In favor: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst,
Tillis, Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Blackburn, Hawley, and
Tuberville
Opposed: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Manchin, Duckworth, Rosen,
Kelly, and Fischer
13. MOTION: To include a provision that would provide for
the independent investigation of sexual harassment complaints.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 12-14
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Duckworth, Rosen, and
Kelly
Opposed: Senators Manchin, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton,
Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Blackburn,
Hawley, and Tuberville
14. MOTION: To include a provision that directs the
Secretary of Defense to fully consider and make needed
adjustments to account for current and emerging climate and
environmental challenges and to ensure the climate resilience
of assets and capabilities of the Department of Defense.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 14-12
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Manchin, Duckworth, Rosen,
Kelly, and Tuberville
Opposed: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds,
Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Blackburn, and Hawley
15. MOTION: To include a provision that would prohibit the
burial in Arlington National Cemetery, Virginia, of any
President or Vice President who is not a member or veteran of
the Armed Forces.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 9-17
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Warren, Peters, Duckworth, and Rosen
Opposed: Senators Kaine, King, Manchin, Kelly, Inhofe,
Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan,
Cramer, Scott, Blackburn, Hawley, and Tuberville
16. MOTION: To include a provision that would provide
heightened revolving door requirements.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 10-16
In favor: Senators Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono, King,
Warren, Peters, Manchin, Duckworth, Rosen, and Hawley
Opposed: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Kaine, Kelly, Inhofe,
Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan,
Cramer, Scott, Blackburn, and Tuberville
17. MOTION: To include a provision that would provide for
enhancement of recusal for conflicts of personal interest
requirements for Department of Defense officers and employees.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 16-10
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Manchin, Duckworth, Rosen,
Kelly, Wicker, Tillis, and Hawley
Opposed: Senators Inhofe, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst,
Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Blackburn, and Tuberville
18. MOTION: To include a provision that would modify the
authority for the commission on naming assets of the Department
of Defense that commemorate the Confederate States of America
or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate
States of America and to prohibit naming assets of the
Department until a report is submitted.
VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 9-17
In favor: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Rounds, Tillis,
Sullivan, Cramer, Scott, Blackburn, and Tuberville
Opposed: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Manchin, Duckworth, Rosen,
Kelly, Fischer, Cotton, Ernst, and Hawley
19. MOTION: To favorably report to the Senate the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022. Reviewing this.
VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 23-3
In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Hirono, Kaine, King, Peters, Manchin, Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly,
Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan,
Cramer, Scott, Blackburn, and Tuberville
Opposed: Senators Warren, Cotton, and Hawley
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
It was not possible to include the Congressional Budget
Office cost estimate on this legislation because it was not
available at the time the report was filed. It will be included
in material presented during Senate floor debate on the
legislation.
Regulatory Impact
Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the
Senate requires that a report on the regulatory impact of the
bill be included in the report on the bill. The committee finds
that there is no regulatory impact in the case of the National
Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2022.
Changes in Exsisting Law
Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of
the Standing Rules of the Senate, the changes in existing law
made by certain portions of the bill have not been shown in
this section of the report because, in the opinion of the
committee, it is necessary to dispense with showing such
changes in order to expedite the business of the Senate and
reduce the expenditure of funds.