[House Report 114-102]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


   114th Congress   }                             {   Report
                       HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES        
   1st Session      }                             {   114-102
________________________________________________________________
                                  
        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016

                               ----------                              

                              R E P O R T

                                 OF THE

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                                   ON

                               H.R. 1735

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]


                                     



  May 5, 2015.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed
                                    

        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016
        
        
114th Congress 
 1st Session            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                 Report
                                                                114-102
_______________________________________________________________________

  

        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 OF THE

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                                   ON

                               H.R. 1735

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

                                     



  May 5, 2015.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed
                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                    One Hundred Fourteenth Congress

             WILLIAM M. ``MAC'' THORNBERRY, Texas, Chairman

WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina      ADAM SMITH, Washington
J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia            LORETTA SANCHEZ, California
JEFF MILLER, Florida                 ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania
JOE WILSON, South Carolina           SUSAN A. DAVIS, California
FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey        JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island
ROB BISHOP, Utah                     RICK LARSEN, Washington
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio              JIM COOPER, Tennessee
JOHN KLINE, Minnesota                MADELEINE Z. BORDALLO, Guam
MIKE ROGERS, Alabama                 JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
TRENT FRANKS, Arizona                NIKI TSONGAS, Massachusetts
BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania           JOHN GARAMENDI, California
K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas            HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr., 
DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado                   Georgia
ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia          JACKIE SPEIER, California
DUNCAN HUNTER, California            JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
JOHN FLEMING, Louisiana              TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado               SCOTT H. PETERS, California
CHRISTOPHER P. GIBSON, New York      MARC A. VEASEY, Texas
VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri             TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
JOSEPH J. HECK, Nevada               TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia                BETO O'ROURKE, Texas
MO BROOKS, Alabama                   DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
RICHARD B. NUGENT, Florida           RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona
PAUL COOK, California                MARK TAKAI, Hawaii
JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma            GWEN GRAHAM, Florida
BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio               BRAD ASHFORD, Nebraska
JACKIE WALORSKI, Indiana             SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts
BRADLEY BYRNE, Alabama               PETE AGUILAR, California
SAM GRAVES, Missouri
RYAN K. ZINKE, Montana
ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York
MARTHA McSALLY, Arizona
STEPHEN KNIGHT, California
THOMAS MacARTHUR, New Jersey
STEVE RUSSELL, Oklahoma

                  Robert L. Simmons II, Staff Director
                  
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Purpose of the Legislation.......................................     1
Rationale for the Committee Bill.................................     2
Hearings.........................................................     8
Committee Position...............................................     8
Explanation of the Committee Amendments..........................     8
Relationship of Authorization to Appropriations..................     8
Summary of Discretionary Authorizations in the Bill..............     8
Budget Authority Implication.....................................     9

DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS.................     9

TITLE I--PROCUREMENT.............................................     9
  OVERVIEW.......................................................     9
    Aircraft Procurement, Army...................................     9
      Overview...................................................     9
      Items of Special Interest..................................    10
        AH-64 Apache helicopter multi-year production contract...    10
        Armed aerial scout rotorcraft............................    10
        Army UH-60A to UH-60L conversions for the National Guard.    10
        Improved MQ-1C Gray Eagle modifications..................    11
    Missile Procurement, Army....................................    11
      Overview...................................................    11
    Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army.....    11
      Overview...................................................    11
      Items of Special Interest..................................    12
        Bradley Fighting Vehicles................................    12
        Combat vehicle industrial base management................    12
        Hercules recovery vehicle................................    14
        M1 Abrams Tank Fleet Configuration.......................    14
        M240 production and industrial base sustainment..........    15
        Modular Handgun System...................................    15
        Small arms production industrial base....................    16
        Stryker lethality upgrades...............................    16
    Procurement of Ammunition, Army..............................    17
      Overview...................................................    17
      Items of Special Interest..................................    17
        Cost assessment of decommissioning lead-based ammunition 
          and associated components..............................    17
        Joint Hydra 70 guided rocket acquisition strategy........    18
        M3 Multi-role Anti-Armor Anti-tank Weapon System.........    18
        Small caliber ammunition industrial base.................    19
    Other Procurement, Army......................................    19
      Overview...................................................    19
      Items of Special Interest..................................    19
        Army radio modernization.................................    19
        Civil Support Team Information Management System.........    20
        Mine resistant ambush protected family of vehicles 
          enduring requirement...................................    20
        Personal protective equipment modernization and 
          industrial base sustainment............................    21
        Rough Terrain Container Handler recapitalization.........    22
        U.S. Army Europe garrison communications.................    22
    Aircraft Procurement, Navy...................................    22
      Overview...................................................    22
      Items of Special Interest..................................    23
        Airborne electronic attack low band transmitter 
          consolidation..........................................    23
        MH-60R and MH-60S service life extension plans...........    23
        MQ-8 Fire Scout..........................................    23
        Reporting of the April 8, 2000, MV-22 mishap at Marana, 
          Arizona................................................    24
        V-22 for carrier on-board delivery.......................    24
        V-22 medical evacuation capability.......................    25
    Weapons Procurement, Navy....................................    25
      Overview...................................................    25
      Items of Special Interest..................................    25
        Joint Standoff Weapon sustainment........................    25
        Tomahawk Block IV........................................    26
    Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps.............    27
      Overview...................................................    27
    Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy............................    27
      Overview...................................................    27
      Items of Special Interest..................................    27
        Advance procurement for Afloat Forward Staging Base......    27
        Air and Missile Defense Radar Testing Evaluation.........    27
        Amphibious ship construction.............................    28
        Coast Guard polar icebreaker.............................    28
        Joint High Speed Vessel Build Specification..............    29
        National Defense Sealift Fund............................    29
        Naval electric weapons systems fielding plan.............    30
        Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine replacement.......    30
        Shipbuilding and industrial base.........................    31
        USS John F. Kennedy two-phase acquisition strategy.......    31
        Virginia Payload Module..................................    32
    Other Procurement, Navy......................................    32
      Overview...................................................    32
      Items of Special Interest..................................    32
        Aegis Refurbishment and Ship Modernization...............    32
        Air and Missile Defense Radar............................    33
        Destroyer modernization..................................    34
        Littoral Combat Ship simulation training.................    34
        Radar Obsolescence and Availability Recovery Upgrades....    34
    Procurement, Marine Corps....................................    35
      Overview...................................................    35
      Items of Special Interest..................................    35
        Garrison Mobile Engineering Equipment....................    35
    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force..............................    35
      Overview...................................................    35
      Items of Special Interest..................................    36
        A-10 aircraft............................................    36
        Air National Guard Wildfire Assistance...................    36
        Air Refueling Recapitalization Strategy..................    37
        Battlefield airborne communications node.................    37
        C-130 modernization plan.................................    37
        C-130H Modernization.....................................    38
        EC-130H Compass Call aircraft............................    39
        F-15 and F-16 spare engine shortfall.....................    39
        F-16 block 40/50 mission training center.................    40
        F-35 aircraft program....................................    40
        Joint surveillance and target attack system sustainment 
          report.................................................    42
        KC-10....................................................    42
        KC-46A quarterly report..................................    42
        RQ-4 and U-2 high-altitude intelligence, surveillance, 
          and reconnaissance capabilities........................    43
        UH-1N replacement program................................    43
    Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force.........................    44
      Overview...................................................    44
    Missile Procurement, Air Force...............................    44
      Overview...................................................    44
    Other Procurement, Air Force.................................    44
      Overview...................................................    44
      Items of Special Interest..................................    44
        Air Force Fire Emergency Services and Personal Protective 
          Equipment..............................................    44
        Civil engineers construction, surveying, and mapping 
          equipment..............................................    45
    Procurement, Defense-Wide....................................    45
      Overview...................................................    45
      Items of Special Interest..................................    45
        Procurement of Standard Missile-3 block IB interceptors..    45
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................    46
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................    46
      Section 101--Authorization of Appropriations...............    46
    Subtitle B--Army Programs....................................    46
      Section 111--Limitation on Availability of Funds for AN/
        TPQ-53 Radar Systems.....................................    46
      Section 112--Prioritization of Upgraded UH-60 Blackhawk 
        Helicopters within Army National Guard...................    46
      Section 113--Report on Options to Accelerate Replacement of 
        UH-60A Blackhawk Helicopters of Army National Guard......    46
    Subtitle C--Navy Programs....................................    47
      Section 121--Modification to Multiyear Procurement 
        Authority for Arleigh Burke Class Destroyers and 
        Associated Systems.......................................    47
      Section 122--Procurement Authority for Aircraft Carrier 
        Programs.................................................    47
    Subtitle D--Air Force Programs...............................    47
      Section 131--Limitation on Availability of Funds for 
        Executive Communications Upgrades for C-20 and C-37 
        Aircraft.................................................    47
      Section 132--Backup Inventory Status of A-10 Aircraft......    47
      Section 133--Prohibition on Availability of Funds for 
        Retirement of A-10 Aircraft..............................    48
      Section 134--Prohibition on Retirement of EC-130H Aircraft.    48
      Section 135--Limitation on Availability of Funds for 
        Divestment or Transfer of KC-10 Aircraft.................    48
    Subtitle E--Defense-wide, Joint, and Multiservice Matters....    48
      Section 141--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Joint 
        Battle Command-Platform..................................    48
      Section 142--Strategy for Replacement of A/MH-6 Mission 
        Enhanced Little Bird Aircraft to Meet Special Operations 
        Requirements.............................................    49
      Section 143--Independent Assessment of United States Combat 
        Logistic Force Requirements..............................    49
      Section 144--Report on Use of Different Types of Enhanced 
        5.56mm Ammunition by the Army and the Marine Corps.......    49
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION............    50
  OVERVIEW.......................................................    50
    Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army............    50
      Overview...................................................    50
      Items of Special Interest..................................    50
        Acoustic mixing technology for energetic materials.......    50
        Active protection system.................................    51
        Advanced tactical shelters...............................    51
        Army airborne networking radios..........................    52
        Army Energy Efficiency Research and Development Programs.    52
        Army Warfighting Assessment and network experimentation 
          activities.............................................    52
        Ballistic Resistant Adaptive Seating System..............    53
        Composite barrel technology development..................    53
        Detection and threat identification technologies.........    54
        Fuel system survivability technology and standards.......    54
        Geo-Enabled Mission Command Enterprise...................    55
        High-resolution 3-D topographic terrain data supporting 
          tactical operations....................................    55
        Human performance research...............................    56
        Improved Turbine Engine Program..........................    56
        Indirect Fire Protection Capability......................    56
        Joint Improvised Explosive Device Analysis Tool..........    57
        Land-Based Anti-Ship Missile Program.....................    57
        Lethal Miniature Aerial Munition System..................    58
        Lithium ion super-capacitors.............................    58
        Material development, characterization, and computational 
          modeling...............................................    58
        Medical evaluation of anthropomorphic data on vehicle 
          blast testing..........................................    59
        Mobile camouflage systems development....................    59
        Next-Generation signature management system..............    59
        Pacific Theater High Performance Computing Capabilities..    59
        Rotorcraft Degraded Visual Environment...................    60
        Simplified Army Radio Network............................    60
        Situational Awareness Prototype Constellation for 
          Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction.................    61
        Soldier Enhancement Program..............................    61
        Soldier Protection System and weight reduction technology    62
        Technology for countering enemy unmanned aerial systems..    62
        Ultra-light combat tactical vehicle test and evaluation..    62
        Vehicle occupant protection technology development.......    63
    Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy............    63
      Overview...................................................    63
      Items of Special Interest..................................    64
        Advanced Low Cost Munitions Ordnance.....................    64
        Anti-Submarine Warfare Continuous Trail Unmanned Vessel..    64
        Anti-surface warfare missile capability for Littoral 
          Combat Ship............................................    64
        Automated Test and Retest................................    65
        Barking Sands Tactical Underwater Range..................    66
        Continuation of Brimstone missile assessment.............    66
        F414 Engine Noise Reduction Research and Development.....    67
        Five-inch precision guided projectile development for 
          naval surface fire support.............................    67
        Fully homomorphic encryption.............................    68
        National Sea Based Deterrence Fund.......................    68
        Navy communications experimentation......................    69
        Requirements maturation and developmental planning.......    69
        Service life extension program for Auxiliary General 
          Purpose Oceanographic Research.........................    69
        Spectral Warrior.........................................    70
        Tactical Combat Training System program..................    70
        Unmanned carrier aviation................................    71
    Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force.......    72
      Overview...................................................    72
      Items of Special Interest..................................    72
        Adaptive engine transition program.......................    72
        Advanced manufacturing for low-cost sustainment..........    73
        Advanced pilot training family of systems................    73
        Air Force Minority Leaders Program.......................    73
        Airborne sensor data correlation.........................    74
        B-52 radar modernization program.........................    74
        Conformal phased array antennas..........................    75
        Digital polarimetric radar development...................    75
        Experimentation program..................................    75
        F-16 active electronically scanned array radar upgrade...    75
        F-35 dual-capable aircraft development program...........    76
        Fifth generation tactical data link enterprise...........    76
        KC-135 auto throttles....................................    77
        KC-46 aerial refueling tanker aircraft program...........    77
        Long-range strike bomber.................................    77
        Long-range strike bomber program.........................    78
        Next Generation Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar 
          System Electro-Optical, Infrared Sensor Capability.....    78
        Next Generation Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar 
          System operational concepts............................    79
        Technology transfer......................................    79
        Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar.........    80
        Wide area surveillance...................................    80
    Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-Wide....    81
      Overview...................................................    81
      Items of Special Interest..................................    81
        Advanced semiconductor platform..........................    81
        Assessment of the directed energy industrial base........    81
        Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office.............    82
        Comptroller General review of advanced semiconductors and 
          microelectronics.......................................    83
        Comptroller General review of technology transition 
          efforts of the Department of Defense...................    83
        Computational Research and Engineering Acquisition Tools 
          and Environment........................................    84
        Corrosion control and prevention.........................    85
        Department of Defense infectious disease research and 
          development............................................    85
        Electronic Warfare Executive Committee...................    86
        Enhancing situation awareness for military aircraft......    86
        High Power Directed Energy research......................    86
        Language Translation Technology..........................    87
        Multiple-Object Kill Vehicle.............................    87
        Report on the Special Operations Command Development of 
          Directed Energy........................................    87
        Research and development work with biosafety facilities..    88
        Ribonucleic acid technology research.....................    88
        Simulation training for emerging health threats..........    89
        Special Operations Forces Combat Diving Program..........    89
        Strategic Capabilities Office transitions of technology..    89
        Technology supporting information operations and 
          strategic communications...............................    90
        U.S. Special Operations Command Terrain Following/Terrain 
          Avoidance Radar program for MC-130J aircraft...........    91
    Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense.....................    92
      Overview...................................................    92
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................    92
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................    92
      Section 201--Authorization of Appropriations...............    92
    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and 
        Limitations..............................................    92
      Section 211--Extension of Defense Research and Development 
        Rapid Innovation Program.................................    92
      Section 212--Limitation on Availability of Funds for 
        Medical Countermeasures Program..........................    92
      Section 213--Limitation on Availability of Funds for F-15 
        Infrared Search and Track Capability Development.........    93
      Section 214--Independent Assessment of F135 Engine Program.    93
    Subtitle C--Other Matters....................................    94
      Section 221--Expansion of Education Partnerships To Support 
        Technology Transfer and Transition.......................    94
      Section 222--Strategies for Engagement with Historically 
        Black Colleges and Universities and Minority-Serving 
        Institutions of Higher Education.........................    94
      Section 223--Plan for Advanced Weapons Technology War Games    94
      Section 224--Comptroller General Review of Autonomic 
        Logistics Information System for F-35 Lightening II 
        Aircraft.................................................    95
      Section 225--Briefing on Shallow Water Combat Submersible 
        Program..................................................    96
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.............................    96
  OVERVIEW.......................................................    96
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................    97
    Budget Request Adjustments...................................    97
      Air Force Remotely Piloted Aircraft Training and Operations    97
      Base Realignment and Closure 2017..........................    98
    Energy Issues................................................    98
      Analysis for Additional Uses of Energy Savings Performance 
        Contracts................................................    98
      Briefing on Energy Performance Initiatives.................    99
      Briefing on Military Installation Readiness................    99
      Collaboration on Operational Energy........................   100
      Progress and Savings from Net Zero Installation Initiatives   100
      Tubular Light-Emitting Diode Technology....................   101
    Logistics and Sustainment Issues.............................   101
      Auxiliary Personnel Lighter Barracks Ships.................   101
      Combat Footwear for Female Service Members.................   102
      Continuous Technology Refreshment..........................   102
      Decision Analysis Using Readiness Cost Analysis Tool.......   103
      Defense Personal Property System...........................   103
      Defense Supply Single Point of Failure Assessment..........   104
      Department of Defense Corrosion Control Efforts............   104
      Depot Maintenance Capability...............................   105
      Humidity-Controlled Shelters and Temporary Buildings.......   105
      Laser Ablation of Coatings.................................   106
      Marine Corps Systems Command Engineering Support...........   106
      Planning for Critical Organizational Clothing and 
        Individual Equipment Innovation..........................   107
      Report on Asset Tracking...................................   107
      Service Life Extension of Emergency Vehicles...............   108
    Readiness Issues.............................................   108
      Advanced Foreign Language Proficiency Training Systems.....   108
      Air Combat Training Range Upgrades.........................   108
      Analysis of Continuous Bomber Presence on Guam.............   109
      Army Explosive Ordnance Disposal...........................   109
      Aviation Support to the Joint Readiness Training Center....   110
      Comptroller General Assessment of Army and Air Force 
        Training Requirements....................................   110
      Comptroller General Assessment of Plans to Rebuild 
        Readiness................................................   111
      Initial Flight Training....................................   112
      Marine Corps Search and Rescue.............................   113
      Optimizing National Guard Training.........................   113
      Performance and Effectiveness of Department of Defense's 
        Joint Exercise Program...................................   114
      Review of the Navy's Optimized Fleet Response Plan.........   114
      Synthetic Training for Small Arms Weapons Skills and Combat 
        Readiness................................................   115
      U.S. Army Pacific Pathways Program.........................   116
      Use of Service Contracts for Simulated Training and 
        Associated Equipment.....................................   117
      Uses of Modeling and Simulation............................   117
    Other Matters................................................   117
      Arctic Investments and Capabilities........................   117
      Briefing on Retirement and Storage of Air Force One (VC-25)   118
      Coconut Rhinoceros Beetle..................................   118
      Deep Water Unexploded Ordnance.............................   119
      Flame Retardant Military Uniform Safety....................   119
      United States Special Operations Command Global Inform and 
        Influence Activities.....................................   119
      Weather and Geographic Impacts on Aerospace Control Alert 
        Missions.................................................   120
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   120
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   120
      Section 301--Authorization of Appropriations...............   120
    Subtitle B--Energy and Environment...........................   120
      Section 311--Limitation on Procurement of Drop-In Fuels....   120
      Section 312--Southern Sea Otter Military Readiness Areas...   120
      Section 313--Revision to Scope of Statutorily Required 
        Review of Projects Relating to Potential Obstructions to 
        Aviation so as to Apply Only to Energy Projects..........   121
      Section 314--Exclusions from Definition of ``Chemical 
        Substance'' under Toxic Substances Control Act...........   121
      Section 315--Exemption of Department of Defense from 
        Alternative Fuel Procurement Requirement.................   121
      Section 316--Limitation on Plan, Design, Refurbishing, or 
        Construction of Biofuels Refineries......................   121
    Subtitle C--Logistics and Sustainment........................   121
      Section 321--Assignment of Certain New Requirements Based 
        on Determinations of Cost-Efficiency.....................   121
      Section 322--Inclusion in Annual Technology and Industrial 
        Capability Assessments of a Determination about Defense 
        Acquisition Program Requirements.........................   121
      Section 323--Amendment to Limitation on Authority to Enter 
        into a Contract for the Sustainment, Maintenance, Repair, 
        or Other Overhaul of the F117 Engine.....................   122
      Section 324--Pilot Programs for Availability of Working-
        Capital Funds for Product Improvements...................   122
      Section 325--Report on Equipment Purchased from Foreign 
        Entities that Could be Manufactured in United States 
        Arsenals or Depots.......................................   122
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   122
      Section 333--Improvements to Department of Defense Excess 
        Property Disposal........................................   122
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS......................   123
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   123
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   124
    Subtitle A--Active Forces....................................   124
      Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces...............   124
      Section 402--Revisions in Permanent Active Duty End 
        Strength Minimum Levels..................................   124
    Subtitle B--Reserve Forces...................................   124
      Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve............   124
      Section 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in 
        Support of the Reserves..................................   125
      Section 413--End Strengths for Military Technicians (Dual 
        Status)..................................................   125
      Section 414--Fiscal Year 2016 Limitation on Number of Non-
        Dual Status Technicians..................................   126
      Section 415--Maximum Number of Reserve Personnel Authorized 
        To Be on Active Duty for Operational Support.............   126
    Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations..................   126
      Section 421--Military Personnel............................   126
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY...............................   127
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   127
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   127
      Air Force Remotely Piloted Aircraft Manning Issues.........   127
      Alcohol Abuse Prevention Programs..........................   128
      Assistance to Local Education Agencies.....................   128
      Commissary Transportation Costs............................   128
      Comptroller General Report on Nutrition Assistance for 
        Active Duty Service Members and Their Families...........   129
      Comptroller General Review of the Federal Voting Assistance 
        Program..................................................   129
      DACA Impact on Military Readiness..........................   130
      Diversity in Department of Defense Advertising.............   130
      Improvements to the Transition Assistance Program..........   130
      Increasing Diversity in Military Academies.................   131
      Inspector General Report on Separation of Members who Made 
        a Sexual Assault Report..................................   131
      Installation Access for Regular College Student Counseling.   131
      National Military Dependent Student Identifier.............   132
      O-6 Command Selection Board Processes......................   132
      Protection of Child Custody Arrangements for Parents Who 
        Are Members of the Armed Forces..........................   133
      Recognizing the Value of the Military Commissary Benefit...   133
      Religious Accommodations in the Armed Forces...............   134
      Report on Female Muslim Garb Policy........................   134
      Report on Performance and Efficiency of Incorporation of 
        Community-based Transition Programs in the Department of 
        Defense Transition Assistance Program....................   135
      Report on Prisoner of War and Missing in Action 
        Declassification Procedures..............................   135
      Rulemaking Under the Military Lending Act..................   135
      Support Ongoing Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps 
        Programs and Encourage Existing Participation............   136
      The Reverent Treatment of Remains..........................   137
      Timely Access to Child Care on Military Installations......   137
      Tracking for Non-Disability Mental Conditions..............   137
      Transfer of Post-9/11 GI Bill Education Benefits...........   138
      U.S. Special Operations Command Preservation of the Force 
        and Families Program.....................................   138
      United States Government Accountability Office Study on 
        Gambling and Problem Gambling in the Armed Forces........   139
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   140
    Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy.........................   140
      Section 501--Equitable Treatment of Junior Officers 
        Excluded from an All-Fully-Qualified-Officers List 
        Because of Administrative Error..........................   140
      Section 502--Authority to Defer Until Age 68 Mandatory 
        Retirement for Age of a General or Flag Officer Serving 
        as Chief or Deputy Chief of Chaplains of the Army, Navy, 
        or Air Force.............................................   140
      Section 503--Implementation of Comptroller General 
        Recommendation on the Definition and Availability of 
        Costs Associated with General and Flag Officers and their 
        Aides....................................................   140
    Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management.....................   140
      Section 511--Clarification of Purpose of Reserve Component 
        Special Selection Boards as Limited to Correction of 
        Error at a Mandatory Promotion Board.....................   140
      Section 512--Ready Reserve Continuous Screening Regarding 
        Key Positions Disqualifying Federal Officials from 
        Continued Service in the Ready Reserve...................   141
      Section 513--Exemption of Military Technicians (Dual 
        Status) from Civilian Employee Furloughs.................   141
      Section 514--Annual Report on Personnel, Training, and 
        Equipment Requirements for the Non-Federalized National 
        Guard to Support Civilian Authorities in the Prevention 
        and Response to Non-Catastrophic Domestic Disasters......   141
      Section 515--National Guard Civil and Defense Support 
        Activities and Related Matters...........................   141
    Subtitle C--Consolidation of Authorities to Order Members of 
        Reserve Components to Perform Duty.......................   141
      Section 521--Administration of Reserve Duty................   141
      Section 522--Reserve Duty Authorities......................   141
      Section 523--Purpose of Reserve Duty.......................   142
      Section 524--Training and Other Duty Performed by Members 
        of the National Guard....................................   142
      Section 525--Conforming and Clerical Amendments............   142
      Section 526--Effective Date and Implementation.............   142
    Subtitle D--General Service Authorities......................   142
      Section 531--Temporary Authority to Develop and Provide 
        Additional Recruitment Incentives........................   142
      Section 532--Expansion of Authority to Conduct Pilot 
        Programs on Career Flexibility to Enhance Retention of 
        Members of the Armed Forces..............................   143
      Section 533--Modification of Notice and Wait Requirements 
        for Change in Ground Combat Exclusion Policy for Female 
        Members of the Armed Forces..............................   143
      Section 534--Role of Secretary of Defense in Development of 
        Gender-Neutral Occupational Standards....................   143
      Section 535--Burdens of Proof Applicable to Investigations 
        and Reviews Related to Protected Communications of 
        Members of the Armed Forces and Prohibited Retaliatory 
        Actions..................................................   143
      Section 536--Revision of Name on Military Service Record to 
        Reflect Change in Gender Identity After Separation from 
        the Armed Forces.........................................   143
      Section 537--Establishment of Breastfeeding Policy for the 
        Department of the Army...................................   144
      Section 538--Sense of the House of Representatives 
        Regarding Secretary of Defense Review of Section 504 of 
        Title 10, United States Code, Regarding Enlisting Certain 
        Aliens in the Armed Forces...............................   144
    Subtitle E--Military Justice, Including Sexual Assault and 
        Domestic Violence Prevention and Response................   144
      Section 541--Improvements to Special Victims' Counsel 
        Program..................................................   144
      Section 542--Department of Defense Civilian Employee Access 
        to Special Victims' Counsel..............................   144
      Section 543--Access to Special Victims' Counsel for Former 
        Dependents of Members and Former Members of the Armed 
        Forces...................................................   144
      Section 544--Representation and Assistance from Special 
        Victims' Counsel in Retaliatory Proceedings..............   144
      Section 545--Timely Notification to Victims of Sex-related 
        Offenses of the Availability of Assistance from Special 
        Victims' Counsel.........................................   145
      Section 546--Participation by Victim in Punitive 
        Proceedings and Access to Records........................   145
      Section 547--Victim Access to Report of Results of 
        Preliminary Hearing under Article 32 of the Uniform Code 
        of Military Justice......................................   145
      Section 548--Minimum Confinement Period Required for 
        Conviction of Certain Sex-Related Offenses Committed by 
        Members of the Armed Forces..............................   145
      Section 549--Strategy to Prevent Retaliation Against 
        Members of the Armed Forces Who Report or Intervene on 
        Behalf of the Victim in Instances of Sexual Assault......   145
      Section 550--Improved Department of Defense Prevention and 
        Response to Sexual Assaults in which the Victim is a Male 
        Member of the Armed Forces...............................   145
      Section 551--Sexual Assault Prevention and Response 
        Training for Administrators and Instructors of the Junior 
        and Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps..............   146
      Section 552--Modification of Manual for Courts-Martial to 
        Require Consistent Preparation of the Full Record of 
        Trial....................................................   146
      Section 553--Inclusion of Additional Information in Annual 
        Reports Regarding Department of Defense Sexual Assault 
        Prevention and Response..................................   146
      Section 554--Retention of Case Notes in Investigations of 
        Sex-Related Offenses Involving Members of the Army, Navy, 
        Air Force, or Marine Corps...............................   146
      Section 555--Additional Guidance Regarding Release of 
        Mental Health Records of Department of Defense Medical 
        Treatment Facilities in Cases Involving any Sex-related 
        Offense..................................................   146
      Section 556--Public Availability of Records of Certain 
        Proceedings under the Uniform Code of Military Justice...   146
      Section 557--Revision of Department of Defense Directive-
        Type Memorandum 15-003, Relating to Registered Sex 
        Offender Identification, Notification, and Monitoring in 
        the Department of Defense................................   147
      Section 558--Improved Implementation of Changes to Uniform 
        Code of Military Justice.................................   147
    Subtitle F--Member Education, Training, and Transition.......   147
      Section 561--Availability of Preseparation Counseling for 
        Members of the Armed Forces Discharged or Released After 
        Limited Active Duty......................................   147
      Section 562--Availability of Additional Training 
        Opportunities under Transition Assistance Program........   147
      Section 563--Enhancements to Yellow Ribbon Reintegration 
        Program..................................................   147
      Section 564--Appointments to Military Service Academies 
        from Nominations Made by Delegates in Congress from the 
        Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the 
        Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.............   147
      Section 565--Recognition of Additional Involuntary 
        Mobilization Duty Authorities Exempt from Five-Year Limit 
        on Reemployment Rights of Persons who Serve in the 
        Uniformed Services.......................................   148
      Section 566--Job Training and Post-Service Placement 
        Executive Committee......................................   148
      Section 567--Direct Employment Pilot Program for Members of 
        the National Guard and Reserve...........................   148
      Section 568--Program Regarding Civilian Credentialing for 
        Skills Required for Certain Military Occupational 
        Specialties..............................................   148
    Subtitle G--Defense Dependents' Education and Military Family 
        Readiness Matters........................................   148
      Section 571--Continuation of Authority to Assist Local 
        Educational Agencies That Benefit Dependents of Members 
        of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense Civilian 
        Employees................................................   148
      Section 572--Extension of Authority to Conduct Family 
        Support Programs for Immediate Family Members of Members 
        of the Armed Forces Assigned to Special Operations Forces   148
      Section 573--Support for Efforts to Improve Academic 
        Achievement and Transition of Military Dependent Students   149
      Section 574--Study Regarding Feasibility of Using DEERS to 
        Track Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and 
        Department of Defense Civilian Employees Who are 
        Elementary or Secondary Education Students...............   149
      Section 575--Sense of Congress Regarding Support for 
        Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces Attending 
        Specialized Camps........................................   149
    Subtitle H--Decorations and Awards...........................   149
      Section 581--Authorization for Award of the Distinguished-
        Service Cross for Acts of Extraordinary Heroism During 
        the Korean War...........................................   149
      Section 582--Limitation on Authority of Secretaries of the 
        Military Departments Regarding Revocation of Combat Valor 
        Awards...................................................   149
      Section 583--Award of Purple Heart to Members of the Armed 
        Forces who were Victims of the Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 
        Bombing..................................................   149
    Subtitle I--Reports and Other Matters........................   150
      Section 591--Authority for United States Air Force 
        Institute of Technology to Charge and Retain Tuition for 
        Instruction of Persons Other Than Air Force Personnel 
        Detailed for Instruction at the Institute................   150
      Section 592--Honoring Certain Members of the Reserve 
        Components as Veterans...................................   150
      Section 593--Support for Designation of 2015 as the Year of 
        the Military Diver.......................................   150
      Section 594--Transfer and Adoption of Military Animals.....   150
      Section 595--Coordination with Non-Government Suicide 
        Prevention Organizations and Agencies to Assist in 
        Reducing Suicides........................................   150
TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS..............   151
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   151
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   151
      Military Allotment Prohibition Briefing to Congress........   151
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   152
    Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances...............................   152
      Section 601--Extension of Authority to Provide Temporary 
        Increase in Rates of Basic Allowance for Housing Under 
        Certain Circumstances....................................   152
      Section 602--Prohibition on Per Diem Allowance Reductions 
        Based on the Duration of Temporary Duty Assignment or 
        Civilian Travel..........................................   152
    Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays...........   152
      Section 611--One-Year Extension of Certain Bonus and 
        Special Pay Authorities for Reserve Forces...............   152
      Section 612--One-Year Extension of Certain Bonus and 
        Special Pay Authorities for Health Care Professionals....   153
      Section 613--One-Year Extension of Special Pay and Bonus 
        Authorities for Nuclear Officers.........................   153
      Section 614--One-Year Extension of Authorities Relating to 
        Title 37 Consolidated Special Pay, Incentive Pay, and 
        Bonus Authorities........................................   153
      Section 615--One-Year Extension of Authorities Relating to 
        Payment of Other Title 37 Bonuses and Special Pays.......   153
      Section 616--Increase in Maximum Annual Amount of Nuclear 
        Officer Bonus Pay........................................   153
      Section 617--Modification to Special Aviation Incentive Pay 
        and Bonus Authorities for Officers.......................   154
      Section 618--Repeal of Obsolete Special Travel and 
        Transportation Allowance for Survivors of Deceased 
        Members of the Armed Forces from the Vietnam Conflict....   154
    Subtitle C--Modernization of Military Retirement System......   154
      Section 631--Full Participation for Members of the 
        Uniformed Services in Thrift Savings Plan................   154
      Section 632--Modernized Retirement System for Members of 
        the Uniformed Services...................................   154
      Section 633--Continuation Pay for Full TSP Members with 12 
        Years of Service.........................................   155
      Section 634--Effective Date and Implementation.............   155
    Subtitle D--Commissary and Nonappropriated Fund 
        Instrumentality Benefits and Operations..................   155
      Section 641--Preserving Assured Commissary Supply to Asia 
        and the Pacific..........................................   155
      Section 642--Prohibition on Replacement or Consolidation of 
        Defense Commissary and Exchange Systems Pending 
        Submission of Required Report on Defense Commissary 
        System...................................................   155
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   155
      Section 651--Improvement of Financial Literacy and 
        Preparedness of Members of the Armed Forces..............   155
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS................................   156
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   156
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   156
      Access to Mental Health Care...............................   156
      Alcohol Prevention and Monitoring Programs.................   157
      Compound Drug Prescriptions................................   157
      Comptroller General Report on Army Warrior Transition Units   157
      Dietary Guidelines for Military Nutrition Programs.........   158
      Direct Hire Authority for Critical Health Care Occupational 
        Shortages................................................   158
      Medical Readiness..........................................   159
      Meeting the Needs of Female Service Member Amputees........   159
      Military Doctors of Podiatric Medicine.....................   159
      Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.............................   160
      Screening, Prevention and Treatment of Hepatitis A, B and C   160
      Status and Impacts of Reductions in TRICARE Prime Service 
        Areas....................................................   160
      Study and Report on the Use of Equine Therapy..............   161
      Transport Telemedicine.....................................   161
      Trauma Care................................................   162
      Wounded Warrior Recovery Care Coordination.................   162
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   163
    Subtitle A--TRICARE and Other Health Care Benefits...........   163
      Section 701--Joint Uniform Formulary for Transition of Care   163
      Section 702--Access to Broad Range of Methods of 
        Contraception Approved by the Food and Drug 
        Administration for Members of the Armed Forces and 
        Military Dependents at Military Treatment Facilities.....   163
      Section 703--Access to Contraceptive Method for Duration of 
        Deployment...............................................   163
      Section 704--Access to Infertility Treatment for Members of 
        the Armed Forces and Dependents..........................   163
    Subtitle B--Health Care Administration.......................   164
      Section 711--Unified Medical Command.......................   164
      Section 712--Licensure of Mental Health Professionals in 
        TRICARE Program..........................................   164
      Section 713--Reports on Proposed Realignments of Military 
        Medical Treatment Facilities.............................   164
      Section 714--Pilot Program for Operation of Network of 
        Retail Pharmacies Under TRICARE Pharmacy Benefits Program   164
    Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters........................   165
      Section 721--Extension of Authority for DOD-VA Health Care 
        Sharing Incentive Fund...................................   165
      Section 722--Extension of Authority for Joint Department of 
        Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility 
        Demonstration Fund.......................................   165
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND 
    RELATED MATTERS..............................................   165
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   165
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   168
      Additions to the Department of Defense's Small Business 
        Policy Website...........................................   168
      Contracting Activities to Employ Disabled Persons..........   168
      Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund.............   168
      Department Management of Unobligated Funds.................   169
      Department of Defense Oversight of Non-Major Defense 
        Acquisition Programs.....................................   170
      Education and Training Related to Commercial Item 
        Procurements.............................................   171
      Education and Training Related to Setting of Requirements..   171
      Education and Training Related to the Conduct of Market 
        Research.................................................   172
      Enabling Systemic Review of Acquisition Laws and 
        Regulations by Establishing Sunset Dates for Acquisition 
        Statutes.................................................   172
      Ethics Awareness and Training..............................   173
      Exchanges with Industry....................................   174
      Foreign Military Sales Procedural Improvements.............   174
      Impact of Rescinded Solicitations on Efficiency and 
        Innovation...............................................   175
      Importance of the North American Defense Industrial Base...   175
      Improvements in Accountability for Contracted Services 
        Spending.................................................   176
      Improving the Acquisition of Contracted Services...........   176
      Improving the Efficiency of the Defense Contract Audit 
        Agency...................................................   177
      Improving the Financial Auditability of the Defense Finance 
        and Accounting Service...................................   178
      Improving the Goals and Metrics for Contracted Services....   179
      Improving the Requirements Development for and Acquisition 
        of Contracted Services...................................   179
      Improving Transparency of Defense Contracted Services 
        Budget Information.......................................   180
      Increased Transparency in Non-Appropriated Fund Contracting   181
      Inspector General Review of Requirements for Senior 
        Department of Defense Officials Seeking Employment with 
        Defense Contractors......................................   182
      Joint Exercises in Operational Contract Support............   182
      Mentor-Protege Program.....................................   183
      Operational Test and Evaluation Processes and Activities of 
        the Department of Defense................................   183
      Report on the Effect of Delays in First-Article Testing....   184
      Requirements Process.......................................   184
      Secretary of Defense Review of Implementing Guidance and 
        Regulation...............................................   185
      Shared Savings through Value Engineering...................   185
      Small Business Implications of the Department of Defense 
        Use of OASIS Contract Vehicle............................   186
      Strategic Minerals Domestic Production Research............   186
      Streamlining Acquisition Reviews by Reducing Unnecessary 
        Documentation............................................   187
      Study and Report Related to Mandates regarding Suitability 
        for Selection as a Senior Official in the Acquisition 
        Workforce................................................   188
      Tracking of Contractor Personnel During Contingencies......   188
      Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and 
        Logistics Assessment of the Value, Feasibility, and Cost 
        of Greater Utilization of HALT/HASS Testing..............   188
      Use of Lowest Price, Technically Acceptable Source 
        Selection Processes......................................   189
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   190
      Section 800--Sense of Congress on the Desired Tenets of the 
        Defense Acquisition System...............................   190
    Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management................   190
      Section 801--Report on Linking and Streamlining 
        Requirements, Acquisition, and Budget Processes within 
        Armed Forces.............................................   190
      Section 802--Required Review of Acquisition-related 
        Functions of the Chiefs of Staff of the Armed Forces.....   191
      Section 803--Independent Study of Matters Related to Bid 
        Protests.................................................   191
      Section 804--Procurement of Commercial Items...............   192
      Section 805--Modification to Information Required to be 
        Submitted by Offeror in Procurement of Major Weapon 
        Systems as Commercial Items..............................   192
      Section 806--Amendment Relating to Multiyear Contract 
        Authority for Acquisition of Property....................   192
      Section 807--Compliance with Inventory of Contracts for 
        Services.................................................   193
    Subtitle B--Workforce Development and Related Matters........   194
      Section 811--Amendments to Department of Defense 
        Acquisition Workforce Development Fund...................   194
      Section 812--Dual-Track Military Professionals in 
        Operational and Acquisition Specialties..................   194
      Section 813--Provision of Joint Duty Assignment Credit for 
        Acquisition Duty.........................................   194
      Section 814--Requirement for Acquisition Skills Assessment 
        Biennial Strategic Workforce Plan........................   194
      Section 815--Mandatory Requirement for Training Related to 
        the Conduct of Market Research...........................   194
      Section 816--Independent Study of Implementation of Defense 
        Acquisition Workforce Improvement Efforts................   195
      Section 817--Extension of Demonstration Project Relating to 
        Certain Acquisition Personnel Management Policies and 
        Procedures...............................................   195
    Subtitle C--Weapon Systems Acquisition and Related Matters...   196
      Section 821--Sense of Congress on the Desired 
        Characteristics for the Weapon Systems Acquisition System   196
      Section 822--Acquisition Strategy Required for Each Major 
        Defense Acquisition Program and Major System.............   196
      Section 823--Revision to Requirements Relating to Risk 
        Management in Development of Major Defense Acquisition 
        Programs and Major Systems...............................   196
      Section 824--Modification to Requirements Relating to 
        Determination of Contract Type for Major Defense 
        Acquisition Programs and Major Systems...................   197
      Section 825--Required Determination before Milestone A 
        Approval or Initiation of Major Defense Acquisition 
        Programs.................................................   197
      Section 826--Required Certification and Determination 
        before Milestone B Approval of Major Defense Acquisition 
        Programs.................................................   198
    Subtitle D--Industrial Base Matters..........................   198
      Section 831--Codification and Amendment of Mentor-Protege 
        Program..................................................   198
      Section 832--Amendments to Data Quality Improvement Plan...   199
      Section 833--Notice of Contract Consolidation for 
        Acquisition Strategies...................................   199
      Section 834--Clarification of Requirements Related to Small 
        Business Contracts for Services..........................   199
      Section 835--Review of Government Access to Intellectual 
        Property Rights of Private Sector Firms..................   200
      Section 836--Requirement that Certain Ship Components be 
        Manufactured in the National Technology and Industrial 
        Base.....................................................   200
      Section 837--Policy Regarding Solid Rocket Motors Used in 
        Tactical Missiles........................................   200
      Section 838--FAR Council Membership for Administrator of 
        Small Business Administration............................   200
      Section 839--Surety Bond Requirements and Amount of 
        Guarantee................................................   200
      Section 840--Certification Requirements for Procurement 
        Center Representatives, Business Opportunity Specialists, 
        and Commercial Market Representatives....................   201
      Section 841--Including Subcontracting Goals in Agency 
        Responsibilities.........................................   201
      Section 842--Modifications to Requirements for Qualified 
        HUBZone Small Business Concerns Located in a Base Closure 
        Area.....................................................   201
      Section 843--Joint Venturing and Teaming...................   201
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   202
      Section 851--Additional Responsibility for Director of 
        Operational Test and Evaluation..........................   202
      Section 852--Use of Recent Prices Paid by the Government in 
        the Determination of Price Reasonableness................   202
      Section 853--Codification of Other Transaction Authority 
        for Certain Prototype Projects...........................   202
      Section 854--Amendments to Certain Acquisition Thresholds..   203
      Section 855--Revision of Method of Rounding when Making 
        Inflation Adjustment of Acquisition-Related Dollar 
        Thresholds...............................................   203
      Section 856--Repeal of Requirement for Stand-Alone Manpower 
        Estimates for Major Defense Acquisition Programs.........   204
      Section 857--Examination and Guidance Relating to Oversight 
        and Approval of Services Contracts.......................   204
      Section 858--Streamlining of Requirements Relating to 
        Defense Business Systems.................................   204
      Section 859--Consideration of Strategic Materials in 
        Preliminary Design Review................................   204
      Section 860--Procurement of Personal Protective Equipment..   204
      Section 861--Amendments Concerning Detection and Avoidance 
        of Counterfeit Electronic Parts..........................   204
      Section 862--Revision to Duties of the Deputy Assistant 
        Secretary of Defense for Developmental Test and 
        Evaluation and the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense 
        for Systems Engineering..................................   205
      Section 863--Extension of Limitation on Aggregate Annual 
        Amount Available for Contract Services...................   205
      Section 864--Use of Lowest Price, Technically Acceptable 
        Evaluation Method for Procurement of Audit or Audit 
        Readiness Services.......................................   205
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT......   206
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   206
      Improving Agility in Shaping the Workforce.................   206
      Productivity Goals.........................................   207
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   207
      Section 901--Redesignation of the Department of the Navy as 
        the Department of the Navy and Marine Corps..............   207
      Section 902--Change of Period for Chairman of the Joint 
        Chiefs of Staff Review of the Unified Command Plan.......   207
      Section 903--Update of Statutory Specification of Functions 
        of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Relating to 
        Joint Force Development Activities.......................   208
      Section 904--Sense of Congress on the United States Marine 
        Corps....................................................   208
      Section 905--Additional Requirements for Streamlining of 
        Department of Defense Management Headquarters............   209
      Section 906--Sense of Congress on Performance Management 
        and Workforce Incentive System...........................   209
      Section 907--Guidelines for Conversion of Functions 
        Performed by Civilian or Contractor Personnel to 
        Performance by Military Personnel........................   209
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS......................................   210
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   210
    Counter-Drug Activities......................................   210
      Counter-Drug Authority Regarding Support to Certain Foreign 
        Governments..............................................   210
      Counternarcotics and Global Threats Strategy...............   210
      National Guard Counterdrug Programs........................   211
      Unaccompanied Alien Children...............................   212
      Western Hemisphere Maritime Intelligence...................   212
    Other Matters................................................   213
      Adequacy of Support Assets for Asia........................   213
      Attendance at Professional and Technical Conferences.......   214
      Comptroller General Review of Drawdown Authority...........   215
      Comptroller General Review of Homeland Response Forces.....   216
      Comptroller General Review of Pandemic Civil Support 
        Planning.................................................   217
      Comptroller General Review of Transferring Improvised 
        Explosive Device Knowledge and Technology Gained by 
        Department of Defense to Civil Authorities...............   217
      Congressional Review of Federal Acquisition Regulation 
        Rulemaking...............................................   218
      Counter Threat Financing and Analytic Tools................   218
      Defense Innovation Initiative..............................   219
      Defense Strategy...........................................   219
      Department of Defense Installation Security................   220
      Electromagnetic Spectrum Roadmap...........................   220
      Foreign Currency Fluctuation Account.......................   221
      Importance of the Department of Defense Meeting Audit 
        Deadlines................................................   222
      Navy's Proposed Transition to an Evolved Contracting 
        Strategy.................................................   223
      Notifications of Changes to the Defense Federal Acquisition 
        Supplement to Congress...................................   224
      Pacific Command Operational Plans..........................   224
      Proposed Retirement of Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron 84 
        and 85 Aircraft..........................................   224
      Recreational Off-Highway Vehicle Briefing..................   225
      Strategic Vision and Plan for an Effective Global Response 
        Force....................................................   225
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   226
    Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................   226
      Section 1001--General Transfer Authority...................   226
      Section 1002--Authority to Transfer Funds to the National 
        Nuclear Security Administration to Sustain Nuclear 
        Weapons Modernization and Naval Reactors.................   226
      Section 1003--Accounting Standards to Value Certain 
        Property, Plant, and Equipment Items.....................   226
    Subtitle B--Counter-Drug Activities..........................   226
      Section 1011--Extension of Authority to Provide Additional 
        Support for Counter-drug Activities of Certain Foreign 
        Governments..............................................   226
      Section 1012--Statement of Policy on Plan Central America..   227
    Subtitle C--Naval Vessels and Shipyards......................   227
      Section 1021--Restrictions on the Overhaul and Repair of 
        Vessels in Foreign Shipyards.............................   228
      Section 1022--Extension of Authority for Reimbursement of 
        Expenses for Certain Navy Mess Operations Afloat.........   228
      Section 1023--Availability of Funds for Retirement or 
        Inactivation of Ticonderoga Class Cruisers or Dock 
        Landing Ships............................................   228
      Section 1024--Limitation on the Use of Funds for Removal of 
        Ballistic Missile Defense Capabilities from Ticonderoga 
        Class Cruisers...........................................   228
    Subtitle D--Counterterrorism.................................   228
      Section 1031--Permanent Authority to Provide Rewards 
        through Government Personnel of Allied Forces and Certain 
        Other Modifications to Department of Defense Program to 
        Provide Rewards..........................................   229
      Section 1032--Congressional Notification of Sensitive 
        Military Operations......................................   229
      Section 1033--Repeal of Semiannual Reports on Obligation 
        and Expenditure of Funds for Combating Terrorism Program.   229
      Section 1034--Reports to Congress on Contact between 
        Terrorists and Individuals Formerly Detained at United 
        States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba...............   229
      Section 1035--Inclusion in Reports to Congress Information 
        about Recidivism of Individuals Formerly Detained at 
        United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba........   230
      Section 1036--Prohibition on the Use of Funds for the 
        Transfer or Release of Individuals Detained at United 
        States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba...............   230
      Section 1037--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................................................   230
      Section 1038--Prohibition on Use of Funds to Transfer or 
        Release Individuals Detained at United States Naval 
        Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to Combat Zones...........   231
      Section 1039--Requirements for Certifications Relating to 
        the Transfer of Detainees at United States Naval Station, 
        Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to Foreign Countries and Other 
        Foreign Entities.........................................   231
      Section 1040--Submission to Congress of Certain Documents 
        Relating to Transfer of Individuals Detained at 
        Guantanamo to Qatar......................................   232
      Section 1041--Submission of Unredacted Copies of Documents 
        Relating to the Transfer of Certain Individuals Detained 
        at Guantanamo to Qatar...................................   232
    Subtitle E--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations........   232
      Section 1051--Enhancement of Authority of Secretary of Navy 
        to Use National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund................   232
      Section 1052--Department of Defense Excess Property Program   233
      Section 1053--Limitation of Transfer of Certain AH-64 
        Apache Helicopters from Army National Guard to Regular 
        Army and Related Personnel Levels........................   233
      Section 1054--Space Available Travel for Environmental 
        Morale Leave by Certain Spouses and Children of Deployed 
        Members of the Armed Forces..............................   233
      Section 1055--Information-Related and Strategic 
        Communications Capabilities Engagement Pilot Program.....   234
      Section 1056--Prohibition on Use of Funds for Retirement of 
        Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron 84 and 85 Aircraft........   234
      Section 1057--Limitation on Availability of Funds for 
        Destruction of Certain Landmines.........................   235
      Section 1058--Limitation on Availability of Funds for 
        Modifying Command and Control of United States Pacific 
        Fleet....................................................   235
      Section 1059--Prohibition on the Closure of United States 
        Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba......................   235
    Subtitle F--Studies and Reports..............................   235
      Section 1061--Provision of Defense Planning Guidance and 
        Contingency Planning Guidance Information to Congress....   235
      Section 1062--Modification of Certain Reports Submitted by 
        Comptroller General of the United States.................   236
      Section 1063--Report on Implementation of the 
        Geographically Distributed Force Laydown in the Area of 
        Responsibility of United States Pacific Command..........   236
      Section 1064--Independent Study of National Security 
        Strategy Formulation Process.............................   237
      Section 1065--Study and Report on Role of Department of 
        Defense in Formulation of Long-term Strategy.............   237
      Section 1066--Report on Potential Threats to Members of the 
        Armed Forces of United States Naval Forces Central 
        Command and United States Fifth Fleet in Bahrain.........   238
    Subtitle G--Repeal or Revision of National Defense Reporting 
        Requirements.............................................   238
      Section 1071--Repeal or Revision of Reporting Requirements 
        Related to Military Personnel Issues.....................   238
      Section 1072--Repeal or Revision of Certain Reports 
        Relating to Readiness....................................   239
      Section 1073--Repeal or Revision of Reporting Requirements 
        Related to Naval Vessels and Merchant Marine.............   240
      Section 1074--Repeal or Revision of Reporting Requirements 
        Related to Nuclear, Proliferation, and Related Matters...   240
      Section 1075--Repeal or Revision of Reporting Requirements 
        Related to Missile Defense...............................   241
      Section 1076--Repeal or Revision of Reporting Requirements 
        Related to Acquisition...................................   241
      Section 1077--Repeal or Revision of Reporting Requirements 
        Related to Civilian Personnel............................   241
      Section 1078--Repeal or Revision of Miscellaneous Reporting 
        Requirements.............................................   241
    Subtitle H--Other Matters....................................   242
      Section 1081--Technical and Clerical Amendments............   242
      Section 1082--Executive Agent for the Oversight and 
        Management of Alternative Compensatory Control Measures..   242
      Section 1083--Navy Support of Ocean Research Advisory Panel   242
      Section 1084--Level of Readiness of Civil Reserve Air Fleet 
        Carriers.................................................   243
      Section 1085--Authorization of Transfer of Surplus Firearms 
        to Corporation for the Promotion of Rifle Practice and 
        Firearms Safety..........................................   243
      Section 1086--Modification of Requirements for Transferring 
        Aircraft within the Air Force Inventory..................   243
      Section 1087--Reestablishment of Commission to Assess the 
        Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse 
        Attacks..................................................   243
      Section 1088--Department of Defense Strategy for Countering 
        Unconventional Warfare...................................   244
      Section 1089--Mine Countermeasures Master Plan.............   244
      Section 1090--Congressional Notification and Briefing 
        Requirement on Ordered Evacuations of United States 
        Embassies and Consulates Involving the Use of United 
        States Armed Forces......................................   244
      Section 1091--Determination and Disclosure of 
        Transportation Costs Incurred by Secretary of Defense for 
        Congressional Trips Outside the United States............   245
TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS.............................   245
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   245
      Assessment of Hiring Authorities for Personnel at the Major 
        Range and Test Facility Base.............................   245
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   245
      Section 1101--One-Year Extension of Temporary Authority to 
        Grant Allowances, Benefits, and Gratuities to Civilian 
        Personnel on Official Duty in a Combat Zone..............   245
      Section 1102--Authority to Provide Additional Allowances 
        and Benefits for Defense Clandestine Service Employees...   245
      Section 1103--Extension of Rate of Overtime Pay for 
        Department of the Navy Employees Performing Work Aboard 
        or Dockside in Support of the Nuclear-Powered Aircraft 
        Carrier Forward Deployed in Japan........................   246
      Section 1104--Modification to Temporary Authorities for 
        Certain Positions at Department of Defense Research and 
        Engineering Facilities...................................   246
      Section 1105--Preference Eligibility for Members of Reserve 
        Components of the Armed Forces Appointed to Competitive 
        Service; Clarification of Appeal Rights..................   246
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS...................   246
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   246
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   248
      Central American Police Forces.............................   248
      Combatant Commander Requirements for Directed Energy 
        Weapons..................................................   249
      Command and Control within Operation Inherent Resolve......   249
      Comptroller General Inventory of Department of Defense 
        Security Cooperation Programs............................   250
      Department of Defense Training Programs on Military Justice 
        and Accountability.......................................   251
      Foreign Military Financing in U.S. European Command........   252
      Guidelines for U.S.-Japan Defense Cooperation..............   252
      Multilateral Sales to Allies...............................   253
      National Guard State Partnership Program...................   253
      Nonlethal Military Support for Ukraine.....................   254
      Operation United Assistance................................   254
      Oversight of Assistance to the Islamic Republic of 
        Afghanistan..............................................   255
      Report on Government Police Training and Equipping Programs   256
      Russian Unconventional Warfare.............................   257
      Support to Coalition Partners Conducting Military 
        Operations within Operation Inherent Resolve.............   258
      The Transition or Termination of the Mission to Counter the 
        Lord's Resistance Army...................................   259
      The Utilization of General Purpose Forces to Meet U.S. 
        Africa Command Requirements..............................   259
      U.S.-Philippines Defense Cooperation.......................   260
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   260
    Subtitle A--Assistance and Training..........................   260
      Section 1201--One-Year Extension of Logistical Support for 
        Coalition Forces Supporting Certain United States 
        Military Operations......................................   260
      Section 1202--Strategic Framework for Department of Defense 
        Security Cooperation.....................................   260
      Section 1203--Modification and Two-Year Extension of 
        National Guard State Partnership Program.................   261
      Section 1204--Extension of Authority for Non-Reciprocal 
        Exchanges of Defense Personnel Between the United States 
        and Foreign Countries....................................   262
    Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Afghanistan and Pakistan.....   262
      Section 1211--Commanders' Emergency Response Program in 
        Afghanistan..............................................   262
      Section 1212--Extension and Modification of Authority for 
        Reimbursement of Certain Coalition Nations for Support 
        Provided to United States Military Operations............   262
      Section 1213--Sense of Congress on United States Policy and 
        Strategy in Afghanistan..................................   263
      Section 1214--Extension of Authority to Acquire Products 
        and Services Produced in Countries along a Major Route of 
        Supply to Afghanistan....................................   263
      Section 1215--Extension of Authority to Transfer Defense 
        Articles and Provide Defense Services to the Military and 
        Security Forces of Afghanistan...........................   263
      Section 1216--Sense of Congress Regarding Assistance for 
        Afghan Translators, Interpreters, and Administrative Aids   264
    Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Syria and Iraq...............   264
      Section 1221--Extension of Authority to Support Operations 
        and Activities of the Office of Security Cooperation in 
        Iraq.....................................................   264
      Section 1222--Comprehensive Strategy for the Middle East 
        and to Counter Islamic Extremism.........................   264
      Section 1223--Modification of Authority to Provide 
        Assistance to Counter the Islamic State of Iraq and the 
        Levant...................................................   265
      Section 1224--Report on United States Armed Forces Deployed 
        in Support of Operation Inherent Resolve.................   266
      Section 1225--Modification of Authority to Provide 
        Assistance to the Vetted Syrian Opposition...............   266
      Section 1226--Assistance to the Government of Jordan for 
        Border Security Operations...............................   267
      Section 1227--Report on Efforts of Turkey to Fight 
        Terrorism................................................   267
    Subtitle D--Matters Relating to Iran.........................   267
      Section 1231--Extension of Annual Report on Military Power 
        of Iran..................................................   267
      Section 1232--Sense of Congress on the Government of Iran's 
        Nuclear Program and its Malign Military Activities.......   267
      Section 1233--Report on Military Posture Required in the 
        Middle East to Deter Iran from Developing a Nuclear 
        Weapon...................................................   268
    Subtitle E--Matters Relating to the Russian Federation.......   268
      Section 1241--Notifications and Updates Relating to 
        Testing, Production, Deployment, and Sale or Transfer to 
        Other States or Non-State Actors of the Club-K Cruise 
        Missile System by the Russian Federation.................   268
      Section 1242--Notifications of Deployment of Nuclear 
        Weapons by Russian Federation to Territory of Ukrainian 
        Republic.................................................   269
      Section 1243--Non-Compliance by the Russian Federation with 
        its Obligations under the INF Treaty.....................   270
      Section 1244--Modification of Notification and Assessment 
        of Proposal to Modify or Introduce New Aircraft or 
        Sensors for Flight by the Russian Federation under Open 
        Skies Treaty.............................................   270
      Section 1245--Sense of Congress on Support for Estonia, 
        Latvia, and Lithuania....................................   271
      Section 1246--Sense of Congress on Support for Georgia.....   271
    Subtitle F--Matters Relating to the Asia-Pacific Region......   271
      Section 1251--Sense of Congress Recognizing the 70th 
        Anniversary of the End of Allied Military Engagement in 
        the Pacific Theater......................................   271
      Section 1252--Sense of Congress Regarding Consolidation of 
        United States Military Facilities in Okinawa, Japan......   271
      Section 1253--Strategy to Promote United States Interests 
        in the Indo-Asia-Pacific Region..........................   271
      Section 1254--Sense of Congress on the United States 
        Alliance with Japan......................................   272
    Subtitle G--Other Matters....................................   272
      Section 1261--Non-Conventional Assisted Recovery 
        Capabilities.............................................   272
      Section 1262--Amendment to the Annual Report under Arms 
        Control and Disarmament Act..............................   272
      Section 1263--Permanent Authority for NATO Special 
        Operations Headquarters..................................   273
      Section 1264--Extension of Authorization to Conduct 
        Activities to Enhance the Capability of Foreign Countries 
        to Respond to Incidents Involving Weapons of Mass 
        Destruction..............................................   273
      Section 1265--Limitation on Availability of Funds for 
        Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force, 
        for Arms Control Implementation..........................   273
      Section 1266--Modification of Authority for Support of 
        Special Operations to Combat Terrorism...................   273
      Section 1267--United States-Israel Anti-Tunnel Defense 
        Cooperation..............................................   273
      Section 1268--Efforts of the Department of Defense to 
        Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence Globally....   273
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION.........................   274
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   274
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   274
      Section 1301--Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction 
        Funds....................................................   275
      Section 1302--Funding Allocations..........................   275
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS..................................   275
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   275
      Assessment of Current State of Global Tantalum Supply......   275
      Insufficient Working-Capital Fund Rate Calculations........   276
      Review of Electronic Waste Recycling.......................   277
      Review of Non-Navy Workload within Navy Working Capital 
        Fund Activities..........................................   277
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   278
    Subtitle A--Military Programs................................   278
      Section 1401--Working Capital Funds........................   278
      Section 1402--National Defense Sealift Fund................   278
      Section 1403--Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, 
        Defense..................................................   278
      Section 1404--Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug 
        Activities, Defense-Wide.................................   278
      Section 1405--Defense Inspector General....................   279
      Section 1406--Defense Health Program.......................   279
      Section 1407--National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund...........   279
    Subtitle B--National Defense Stockpile.......................   279
      Section 1411--Extension of Date for Completion of 
        Destruction of Existing Stockpile of Lethal Chemical 
        Agents and Munitions.....................................   279
    Subtitle C--Working-Capital Funds............................   279
      Section 1421--Limitation on Furlough of Department of 
        Defense Employees Paid Through Working-Capital Funds.....   279
      Section 1422--Working-Capital Fund Reserve Account for 
        Petroleum Market Price Fluctuations......................   279
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   280
      Section 1431--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......................   280
      Section 1432--Authorization of Appropriations for Armed 
        Forces Retirement Home...................................   280
TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR OVERSEAS 
    CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.......................................   280
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   280
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   280
      Counterterrorism Partnerships Fund.........................   280
      Funding and Support for the European Reassurance Initiative   281
      National Guard and Reserve Component Equipment Account.....   282
      Support to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan to Counter the 
        Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.....................   282
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   283
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   283
      Section 1501--Purpose......................................   283
      Section 1502--Procurement..................................   283
      Section 1503--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation..   283
      Section 1504--Operation and Maintenance....................   283
      Section 1505--Military Personnel...........................   283
      Section 1506--Working Capital Funds........................   283
      Section 1507--Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug 
        Activities, Defense-Wide.................................   283
      Section 1508--Defense Inspector General....................   284
      Section 1509--Defense Health Program.......................   284
    Subtitle B--Financial Matters................................   284
      Section 1521--Treatment as Additional Authorizations.......   284
      Section 1522--Special Transfer Authority...................   284
    Subtitle C--European Reassurance Initiative and Related 
        Matters..................................................   284
      Section 1531--Statement of Policy Regarding European 
        Reassurance Initiative...................................   284
      Section 1532--Assistance and Sustainment to the Military 
        and National Security Forces of Ukraine..................   284
    Subtitle D--Limitations, Reports, and Other Matters..........   285
      Section 1541--Continuation of Existing Limitation on Use of 
        Afghanistan Security Forces Fund.........................   285
      Section 1542--Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund   286
TITLE XVI--STRATEGIC PROGRAMS, CYBER, AND INTELLIGENCE MATTERS...   286
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   286
      Army Space Programs........................................   286
      Calibration of Space Sensors...............................   287
      Combatant Command Commercial Imagery Tasking...............   287
      Commercial Space-based Environmental Monitoring............   287
      Comptroller General Review of Patriot System...............   288
      Continuing Oversight of Missile Defense Discussions with 
        the Russian Federation...................................   289
      Cyber Defense Network Segmentation.........................   289
      Cyber Support to Civil Authorities.........................   289
      Department of Defense Cyber Mission Forces.................   290
      Deployment of a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense Battery 
        in the Republic of Korea.................................   291
      Development of Missile Defense Targets Related to the 
        Hypersonic Threat........................................   291
      Distributed Common Grounds System-Army GAO Report..........   292
      Evaluation of Missile Defense Options to Confront 
        Hypersonic Missile Systems...............................   292
      Evaluation of National Security Space and Missile Test 
        Ranges and Infrastructure................................   293
      Funding for Pilot Program for Acquisition of Commercial 
        Satellite Communication Services.........................   294
      Funding Mechanism for Department of Defense Priorities at 
        the National Nuclear Security Administration.............   294
      Global Positioning System..................................   294
      Ground Based Strategic Deterrent...........................   295
      Imagery Analysis and Acquisition...........................   296
      Improving Contract Cost Data Collection and Analysis at the 
        Missile Defense Agency through Evaluation of Terminal 
        High Altitude Area Defense Multiyear Procurement.........   296
      Integrated Air and Missile Defense Strategy................   297
      Interagency Collaboration on Physical Security for Nuclear 
        Weapons..................................................   297
      Joint Integrated Lifecycle Surety..........................   298
      Joint Space Operations Center Mission System...............   298
      Mission System Cybersecurity...............................   299
      Mobile User Objective System...............................   299
      Modeling and Simulation for Nuclear Targeting and Planning.   300
      Multi-source Cyber Intelligence Analysis Needs.............   300
      Multiyear Procurement of Commercial Satellite 
        Communications...........................................   301
      National Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Resilience....   301
      National Security Space Acquisition........................   302
      Network Access Control Technologies for Secure Facilities..   302
      Nuclear Command, Control, and Communications Budget 
        Displays.................................................   303
      Nuclear Detection Capability...............................   303
      Nuclear Enterprise Review..................................   304
      Operationally Responsive Space.............................   304
      Organization of the Military Service and Technical 
        Intelligence Centers.....................................   305
      Patriot Product Improvement................................   305
      Programmable Embedded Information Security Product.........   306
      Protected Tactical Satellite Communications................   306
      Quarterly Briefings on Strategic Forces....................   307
      Report on Current and Anticipated Global Demand for U.S. 
        Missile Defense Systems..................................   308
      Report on Improving Discrimination for Missile Defense.....   308
      Report on Patriot Guidance Enhanced Missile Tactical 
        Ballistic Missile Recertification for Allied Inventory...   308
      Report on Strategic Missile Commonality....................   309
      Responsive Launch..........................................   310
      Roadmap for the Ground-based Midcourse Defense System......   310
      Satellite Communications Interference......................   311
      Satellite Ground Systems and Overhead Persistent Infrared 
        Data.....................................................   311
      Science and Technology Intelligence........................   312
      Smart Building Cyber Vulnerability Assessment..............   313
      Space Situational Awareness................................   313
      Spaceports.................................................   313
      Strategic Deterrence Research and Education................   313
      Strengthening National Security Space......................   314
      Study on Left-of-Launch....................................   315
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   317
    Subtitle A--Space Activities.................................   317
      Section 1601--Major Force Program and Budget for National 
        Security Space Programs..................................   317
      Section 1602--Modification to Development of Space Science 
        and Technology Strategy..................................   317
      Section 1603--Rocket Propulsion System Development Program.   317
      Section 1604--Modification to Prohibition on Contracting 
        with Russian Suppliers of Rocket Engines for the Evolved 
        Expendable Launch Vehicle Program........................   318
      Section 1605--Delegation of Authority Regarding Purchase of 
        Global Positioning System User Equipment.................   318
      Section 1606--Acquisition Strategy for Evolved Expendable 
        Launch Vehicle Program...................................   319
      Section 1607--Procurement of Wideband Satellite 
        Communications...........................................   320
      Section 1608--Limitation on Availability of Funds for 
        Weather Satellite Follow-On System.......................   320
      Section 1609--Modification of Pilot Program for Acquisition 
        of Commercial Satellite Communication Services...........   320
      Section 1610--Prohibition on Reliance on China and Russia 
        for Space-Based Weather Data.............................   321
      Section 1611--Evaluation of Exploitation of Space-based 
        Infrared System Against Additional Threats...............   321
      Section 1612--Plan on Full Integration and Exploitation of 
        Overhead Persistent Infrared Capability..................   321
      Section 1613--Options for Rapid Space Reconstitution.......   322
      Section 1614--Sense of Congress on Space Defense...........   322
      Section 1615--Sense of Congress on Missile Defense Sensors 
        in Space.................................................   322
    Subtitle B--Defense Intelligence and Intelligence-Related 
        Activities...............................................   322
      Section 1621--Executive Agent for Open-Source Intelligence 
        Tools....................................................   322
      Section 1622--Waiver and Congressional Notification 
        Requirements Related to Facilities for Intelligence 
        Collection or for Special Operations Abroad..............   322
      Section 1623--Prohibition on National Intelligence Program 
        Consolidation............................................   323
      Section 1624--Limitation on Availability of Funds for 
        Distributed Common Ground System of the Army.............   323
      Section 1625--Limitation on Availability of Funds for 
        Distributed Common Ground System of the United States 
        Special Operations Command...............................   323
      Section 1626--Limitation on Availability of Funds for 
        Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence   323
      Section 1627--Clarification of Annual Briefing on the 
        Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance 
        Requirements of the Combatant Commands...................   324
      Section 1628--Department of Defense Intelligence Needs.....   324
      Section 1629--Report on Management of Certain Programs of 
        Defense Intelligence Elements............................   324
      Section 1630--Government Accountability Office Review of 
        Intelligence Input to the Defense Acquisition Process....   324
    Subtitle C--Cyberspace-related Matters.......................   325
      Section 1641--Codification and Addition of Liability 
        Protections Relating to Reporting on Cyber Incidents or 
        Penetrations of Networks and Information Systems of 
        Certain Contractors......................................   325
    Subtitle D--Nuclear Forces...................................   325
      Section 1651--Organization of Nuclear Deterrence Functions 
        of the Air Force.........................................   325
      Section 1652--Assessment of Threats to National Leadership 
        Command, Control, and Communications System..............   326
      Section 1653--Procurement Authority for Certain Parts of 
        Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Fuzes.................   326
      Section 1654--Annual Briefing on the Costs of Forward-
        Deploying Nuclear Weapons in Europe......................   326
      Section 1655--Sense of Congress on Importance of 
        Cooperation and Collaboration between United States and 
        United Kingdom on Nuclear Issues.........................   326
      Section 1656--Sense of Congress on Organization of Navy for 
        Nuclear Deterrence Mission...............................   327
    Subtitle E--Missile Defense Programs.........................   327
      Section 1661--Prohibitions on Providing Certain Missile 
        Defense Information to Russian Federation................   327
      Section 1662--Prohibition on Integration of Missile Defense 
        Systems of China into Missile Defense Systems of United 
        States...................................................   328
      Section 1663--Prohibition on Integration of Missile Defense 
        Systems of Russian Federation into Missile Defense 
        Systems of United States and NATO........................   328
      Section 1664--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Long-
        Range Discriminating Radar...............................   328
      Section 1665--Limitations on Availability of Funds for 
        Patriot Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Capability of 
        the Army.................................................   328
      Section 1666--Integration and Interoperability of Air and 
        Missile Defense Capabilities of the United States........   329
      Section 1667--Integration of Allied Missile Defense 
        Capabilities.............................................   329
      Section 1668--Missile Defense Capability in Europe.........   330
      Section 1669--Availability of Funds for Iron Dome Short-
        Range Rocket Defense System..............................   331
      Section 1670--Israeli Cooperative Missile Defense Program 
        Co-Development and Potential Co-Production...............   331
      Section 1671--Development and Deployment of Multiple-Object 
        Kill Vehicle for Missile Defense of the United States 
        Homeland.................................................   332
      Section 1672--Boost Phase Defense System...................   332
      Section 1673--East Coast Homeport of Sea-Based X-Band Radar   333
      Section 1674--Plan for Medium Range Ballistic Missile 
        Defense Sensor Alternatives for Enhanced Defense of 
        Hawaii...................................................   333
      Section 1675--Research and Development of Non-terrestrial 
        Missile Defense Layer....................................   333
      Section 1676--Aegis Ashore Capability Development..........   333
      Section 1677--Briefings on Procurement and Planning of 
        Left-of-Launch Capability................................   334

DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS.................   334
  PURPOSE........................................................   334
  MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND FAMILY HOUSING OVERVIEW..............   334
      Section 2001--Short Title..................................   335
      Section 2002--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts 
        Required to be Specified by Law..........................   335
      Section 2003--Effective Date...............................   335
TITLE XXI--ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION............................   335
  SUMMARY........................................................   335
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   335
      Defense Generator and Rail Equipment Center................   335
      Explanation of Funding Adjustments.........................   336
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   336
      Section 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land 
        Acquisition Projects.....................................   336
      Section 2102--Family Housing...............................   336
      Section 2103--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units   336
      Section 2104--Authorization of Appropriations, Army........   337
      Section 2105--Modification of Authority to Carry Out 
        Certain Fiscal Year 2013 Project.........................   337
      Section 2106--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal 
        Year 2012 Projects.......................................   337
      Section 2107--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal 
        Year 2013 Projects.......................................   337
      Section 2108--Additional Authority to Carry Out Certain 
        Fiscal Year 2016 Projects................................   337
TITLE XXII--NAVY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION...........................   337
  SUMMARY........................................................   337
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   338
      Explanation of Funding Adjustment..........................   338
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   339
      Section 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land 
        Acquisition Projects.....................................   339
      Section 2202--Family Housing...............................   339
      Section 2203--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units   339
      Section 2204--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy........   339
      Section 2205--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal 
        Year 2012 Projects.......................................   339
      Section 2206--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal 
        Year 2013 Projects.......................................   339
      Section 2207--Townsend Bombing Range Expansion, Phase 2....   339
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION.....................   340
  SUMMARY........................................................   340
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   340
      Explanation of Funding Adjustment..........................   340
      Former Norton Air Force Base, California...................   340
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   341
      Section 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land 
        Acquisition Projects.....................................   341
      Section 2302--Family Housing...............................   341
      Section 2303--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units   341
      Section 2304--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force...   341
      Section 2305--Modification of Authority to Carry Out 
        Certain Fiscal Year 2010 Project.........................   341
      Section 2306--Modification of Authority to Carry Out 
        Certain Fiscal Year 2014 Project.........................   341
      Section 2307--Modification of Authority to Carry Out 
        Certain Fiscal Year 2015 Project.........................   342
      Section 2308--Extension of Authorization of Certain Fiscal 
        Year 2012 Project........................................   342
      Section 2309--Extension of Authorization of Certain Fiscal 
        Year 2013 Project........................................   342
      Section 2310--Limitation on Project Authorization to Carry 
        Out Certain Fiscal Year 2016 Project.....................   342
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES MILITARY CONSTRUCTION...............   342
  SUMMARY........................................................   342
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   343
      Explanation of Funding Adjustments.........................   343
      Red Hill Underground Fuel Storage Facility.................   345
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   345
      Section 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and 
        Land Acquisition Projects................................   345
      Section 2402--Authorized Energy Conservation Projects......   346
      Section 2403--Authorization of Appropriations, Defense 
        Agencies.................................................   346
      Section 2404--Modification of Authority to Carry Out 
        Certain Fiscal Year 2012 Project.........................   346
      Section 2405--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal 
        Year 2012 Projects.......................................   346
      Section 2406--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal 
        Year 2013 Projects.......................................   346
      Section 2407--Modification and Extension of Authority to 
        Carry Out Certain Fiscal Year 2014 Project...............   346
TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT 
    PROGRAM......................................................   347
  SUMMARY........................................................   347
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   347
      Section 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land 
        Acquisition Projects.....................................   347
      Section 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO........   347
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES..................   347
  SUMMARY........................................................   347
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   347
      Explanation of Funding Adjustments.........................   347
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   348
    Subtitle A--Project Authorizations and Authorization of 
        Appropriations...........................................   348
      Section 2601--Authorized Army National Guard Construction 
        and Land Acquisition Projects............................   348
      Section 2602--Authorized Army Reserve Construction and Land 
        Acquisition Projects.....................................   348
      Section 2603--Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps 
        Reserve Construction and Land Acquisition Projects.......   348
      Section 2604--Authorized Air National Guard Construction 
        and Land Acquisition Projects............................   348
      Section 2605--Authorized Air Force Reserve Construction and 
        Land Acquisition Projects................................   349
      Section 2606--Authorization of Appropriations, National 
        Guard and Reserve........................................   349
    Subtitle B--Other Matters....................................   349
      Section 2611--Modification and Extension of Authority to 
        Carry Out Certain Fiscal Year 2013 Project...............   349
      Section 2612--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal 
        Year 2012 Projects.......................................   349
      Section 2613--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal 
        Year 2013 Projects.......................................   349
TITLE XXVII--BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES.............   350
  SUMMARY........................................................   350
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   350
      Section 2701--Authorization of Appropriations for Base 
        Realignment and Closure Activities Funded through 
        Department of Defense Base Closure Account...............   350
      Section 2702--Prohibition on Conducting Additional Base 
        Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Round.....................   350
TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PROVISIONS...........   350
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   350
      Collaboration on Electromagnetic Pulse Threats to the 
        Electrical Grid..........................................   350
      Conveyance of Water and Wastewater Systems on Guam.........   351
      Defense Laboratory Enterprise Infrastructure...............   351
      F-35 Stationing, Basing, and Laydown Selection Process.....   352
      Facilities Sustainment and Recapitalization Policy and 
        Funding..................................................   352
      Impact of Wind Energy Developments on Military 
        Installations............................................   353
      Improvement of Design-Build Selection Process..............   354
      Intergovernmental Support Agreements.......................   354
      Joint Basing...............................................   355
      Lincoln Laboratory Recapitalization........................   355
      Major Range and Test Facility Base Military Construction 
        Assessment...............................................   355
      Non-Federally Connected Civilian Children Residing in 
        Military Privatized Housing..............................   356
      Public Schools on Department of Defense Installations......   357
      Utility Privatization......................................   357
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   358
    Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family 
        Housing Changes..........................................   358
      Section 2801--Revision of Congressional Notification 
        Thresholds for Reserve Facility Expenditures and 
        Contributions to Reflect Congressional Notification 
        Thresholds for Minor Construction and Repair Projects....   358
      Section 2802--Authority for Acceptance and Use of 
        Contributions from Kuwait for Construction, Maintenance, 
        and Repair Projects Mutually Beneficial to the Department 
        of Defense and Kuwait Military Forces....................   358
      Section 2803--Defense Laboratory Modernization Pilot 
        Program..................................................   358
    Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration......   358
      Section 2811--Enhancement of Authority to Accept 
        Conditional Gifts of Real Property on Behalf of Military 
        Service Academies........................................   358
      Section 2812--Consultation Requirement in Connection with 
        Department of Defense Major Land Acquisitions............   359
      Section 2813--Additional Master Plan Reporting Requirements 
        Related to Main Operating Bases, Forward Operating Sites, 
        and Cooperative Security Locations of Central Command and 
        Africa Command Areas of Responsibility...................   359
      Section 2814--Force-Structure Plan and Infrastructure 
        Inventory and Assessment of Infrastructure Necessary to 
        Support the Force Structure..............................   359
    Subtitle C--Provisions Related to Asia-Pacific Military 
        Realignment..............................................   360
      Section 2821--Restriction on Development of Public 
        Infrastructure in Connection with Realignment of Marine 
        Corps Forces in Asia-Pacific Region......................   360
      Section 2822--Annual Report on Government of Japan 
        Contributions toward Realignment of Marine Corps Forces 
        in Asia-Pacific Region...................................   360
    Subtitle D--Land Conveyances.................................   360
      Section 2831--Land Exchange Authority, Mare Island Army 
        Reserve Center, Vallejo, California......................   360
      Section 2832--Land Exchange, Navy Outlying Landing Field, 
        Naval Air Station, Whiting Field, Florida................   360
      Section 2833--Release of Property Interests Retained in 
        Connection with Land Conveyance, Fort Bliss Military 
        Reservation, Texas.......................................   361
    Subtitle E--Military Land Withdrawals........................   361
      Section 2841--Withdrawal and Reservation of Public Land, 
        Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, California.........   361
      Section 2842--Bureau of Land Management Withdrawn Military 
        Lands Efficiency and Savings.............................   361
    Subtitle F--Military Memorials, Monuments, and Museums.......   361
      Section 2851--Renaming Site of the Dayton Aviation Heritage 
        National Historical Park, Ohio...........................   361
      Section 2852--Extension of Authority for Establishment of 
        Commemorative Work in Honor of Brigadier General Francis 
        Marion...................................................   361
      Section 2853--Amendments to the National Historic 
        Preservation Act.........................................   361
    Subtitle G--Other Matters....................................   362
      Section 2861--Modification of Department of Defense 
        Guidance on Use of Airfield Pavement Markings............   362
      Section 2862--Protection and Recovery of Greater Sage 
        Grouse...................................................   362
TITLE XXIX--OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS MILITARY CONSTRUCTION   362
  SUMMARY........................................................   362
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   363
      Section 2901--Authorized Army Construction and Land 
        Acquisition Project......................................   363
      Section 2902--Authorized Navy Construction and Land 
        Acquisition Projects.....................................   363
      Section 2903--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land 
        Acquisition Projects.....................................   363
      Section 2904--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and 
        Land Acquisition Projects................................   363
      Section 2905--Authorization of Appropriations..............   363

DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS 
  AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.......................................   363

TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS......   363
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   363
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   364
    National Nuclear Security Administration.....................   364
      Overview...................................................   364
      Weapons Activities.........................................   364
        Advanced Radiography.....................................   364
        B61-12 and W76-1 Life Extension Programs.................   364
        Defense Nuclear Security.................................   365
        Deferred Maintenance.....................................   366
        Funding prioritization within Weapons Activities.........   367
        Funding related to execution of life extension programs..   367
        Governance and management of the nuclear security 
          enterprise.............................................   368
        Plutonium strategy.......................................   369
        Primary Assessment Technologies..........................   369
        Stockpile Surveillance and Assessment....................   370
        Uranium for national security purposes...................   370
        W78/88-1 Life Extension Program..........................   371
        W88 Alt 370 and W80-4 Life Extension Program.............   371
        Weapons dismantlement and disposition....................   372
      Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation...........................   373
        Comptroller General assessment of Nonproliferation 
          Research and Development Program.......................   373
        Funding prioritization within Defense Nuclear 
          Nonproliferation.......................................   373
        Nuclear Counterterrorism and Incident Response Program...   374
        Verification and detection technology....................   375
      Naval Reactors.............................................   376
        Naval Reactors and Spent Fuel Handling Recapitalization 
          Project................................................   376
      Federal Salaries and Expenses..............................   376
        Classification guidance..................................   376
        Director for Cost Estimating and Program Evaluation......   377
        Improvements to National Nuclear Security Administration 
          budget structure.......................................   377
        Labor cost review........................................   378
        Provision of information to Congress by management and 
          operating contractors..................................   378
        Reforming and streamlining access authorizations for 
          Restricted Data........................................   379
    Environmental and Other Defense Activities...................   379
      Overview...................................................   379
      Defense Environmental Cleanup..............................   379
        Hanford and Savannah River...............................   379
        Report on Pension Adjustments............................   380
        Technology development...................................   380
        Waste Isolation Pilot Plant..............................   380
      Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal.............................   381
        Defense nuclear waste repository.........................   381
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   381
    Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations........   381
      Section 3101--National Nuclear Security Administration.....   381
      Section 3102--Defense Environmental Cleanup................   381
      Section 3103--Other Defense Activities.....................   382
    Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and 
        Limitations..............................................   382
      Section 3111--Authorized Personnel Levels of National 
        Nuclear Security Administration..........................   382
      Section 3112--Full-time Equivalent Contractor Personnel 
        Levels...................................................   382
      Section 3113--Improvement to Accountability of Department 
        of Energy Employees and Projects.........................   382
      Section 3114--Cost-Benefit Analyses for Competition of 
        Management and Operating Contracts.......................   384
      Section 3115--Nuclear Weapon Design Responsiveness Program.   384
      Section 3116--Disposition of Weapons-Usable Plutonium......   385
      Section 3117--Prohibition on Availability of Funds for 
        Fixed Site Radiological Portal Monitors in Foreign 
        Countries................................................   385
      Section 3118--Prohibition on Availability of Funds for 
        Provision of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Assistance 
        to Russian Federation....................................   385
      Section 3119--Limitation on Authorization of Production of 
        Special Nuclear Material Outside the United States by 
        Foreign Country with Nuclear Naval Propulsion Program....   385
      Section 3120--Limitation on Availability of Funds for 
        Development of Certain Nuclear Nonproliferation 
        Technologies.............................................   386
      Section 3121--Limitation on Availability of Funds for 
        Unilateral Disarmament...................................   386
      Section 3122--Use of Best Practices for Capital Asset 
        Projects and Nuclear Weapon Life Extension Programs......   387
    Subtitle C--Plans and Reports................................   387
      Section 3131--Root Cause Analyses for Certain Cost Overruns   387
      Section 3132--Extension and Modification of Certain Annual 
        Reports on Nuclear Nonproliferation......................   388
      Section 3133--Governance and Management of Nuclear Security 
        Enterprise...............................................   388
      Section 3134--Assessments on Nuclear Proliferation Risks 
        and Nuclear Nonproliferation Opportunities...............   389
      Section 3135--Independent Review of Laboratory-Directed 
        Research and Development Programs........................   389
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   389
      Section 3141--Transfer, Decontamination, and 
        Decommissioning of Nonoperational Facilities.............   389
      Section 3142--Research and Development of Advanced Naval 
        Nuclear Fuel System Based on Low-Enriched Uranium........   390
      Section 3143--Plutonium Pit Production Capacity............   391
      Section 3144--Analysis of Alternatives for Mobile Guardian 
        Transporter Program......................................   391
      Section 3145--Development of Strategy on Risks to 
        Nonproliferation Caused by Additive Manufacturing........   392
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD.............   392
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   392
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   392
      Section 3201--Authorization................................   392
      Section 3202--Administration of Defense Nuclear Facilities 
        Safety Board.............................................   392
TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES............................   393
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   393
      Section 3401--Authorization of Appropriations..............   393
TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION..............................   393
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   393
      Merchant Mariner Workforce.................................   393
      National Security Multi-Mission Vessel.....................   393
      Small Shipyard Grants......................................   394
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   394
      Section 3501--Authorization of Appropriations for National 
        Security Aspects of the Merchant Marine for Fiscal Year 
        2016.....................................................   394
      Section 3502--Sense of Congress Regarding Maritime Security 
        Fleet Program............................................   394
      Section 3503--Update of References to the Secretary of 
        Transportation Regarding Unemployment Insurance and 
        Vessel Operators.........................................   395
      Section 3504--Reliance on Classification Society 
        Certification for Purposes of Eligibility for Certificate 
        of Inspection............................................   395

DIVISION D--FUNDING TABLES.......................................   395
      Section 4001--Authorization of Amounts in Funding Tables...   395
      Summary of National Defense Authorizations for Fiscal Year 
        2016.....................................................   395
      National Defense Budget Authority Implication..............   401
TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT...........................................   403
      Section 4101--Procurement..................................   403
      Section 4102--Procurement for Overseas Contingency 
        Operations...............................................   445
TITLE XLII--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION..........   453
      Section 4201--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation..   453
      Section 4202--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation 
        for Overseas Contingency Operations......................   487
TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE...........................   489
      Section 4301--Operation and Maintenance....................   489
      Section 4302--Operation and Maintenance for Overseas 
        Contingency Operations...................................   504
      Section 4303--Operation and Maintenance for Overseas 
        Contingency Operations for Base Requirements.............   514
TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL...................................   523
      Section 4401--Military Personnel...........................   523
      Section 4402--Military Personnel for Overseas Contingency 
        Operations...............................................   524
TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS..................................   525
      Section 4501--Other Authorizations.........................   525
      Section 4502--Other Authorizations for Overseas Contingency 
        Operations...............................................   529
TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION................................   531
      Section 4601--Military Construction........................   531
      Section 4602--Military Construction for Overseas 
        Contingency Operations...................................   544
TITLE XLVII--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS.....   545
      Section 4701--Department of Energy National Security 
        Programs.................................................   545

Department of Defense Authorization Request......................   557
Communications from Other Committees.............................   560
Fiscal Data......................................................   572
Congressional Budget Office Estimate.............................   572
Statement Required by the Congressional Budget Act...............   575
Committee Cost Estimate..........................................   575
Advisory of Earmarks.............................................   575
Oversight Findings...............................................   575
General Performance Goals and Objectives.........................   575
Statement of Federal Mandates....................................   577
Federal Advisory Committee Statement.............................   577
Applicability to the Legislative Branch..........................   577
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................   578
Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings..............................   578
Committee Votes..................................................   578
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............   607
Dissenting Views.................................................   608



114th Congress      }                                {     Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session        }                                {     114-102
====================================================================
 
       NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016

                                _______
                                

  May 5, 2015.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Thornberry, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 1735]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Armed Services, to whom was referred the 
bill (H.R. 1735) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 
2016 for military activities of the Department of Defense and 
for military construction, to prescribe military personnel 
strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, having 
considered the same, reports favorably thereon with amendments 
and recommends that the bill as amended do pass.
    The amendments are as follows:
    The amendment strikes all after the enacting clause of the 
bill and inserts a new text which appears in italic type in the 
reported bill.
    The title of the bill is amended to reflect the amendment 
to the text of the bill.

                       PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATION

    The bill would: (1) Authorize appropriations for fiscal 
year 2016 for procurement and for research, development, test, 
and evaluation (RDT&E); (2) Authorize appropriations for fiscal 
year 2016 for operation and maintenance (O&M) and for working 
capital funds; (3) Authorize for fiscal year 2016: (a) the 
personnel strength for each Active Duty component of the 
military departments; (b) the personnel strength for the 
Selected Reserve for each Reserve Component of the Armed 
Forces; (4) Modify various elements of compensation for 
military personnel and impose certain requirements and 
limitations on personnel actions in the defense establishment; 
(5) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2016 for military 
construction and family housing; (6) Authorize appropriations 
for Overseas Contingency Operations; (7) Authorize 
appropriations for fiscal year 2016 for the Department of 
Energy national security programs; and (8) Authorize 
appropriations for fiscal year 2016 for the Maritime 
Administration.

                    RATIONALE FOR THE COMMITTEE BILL

    H.R. 1735, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) 
for Fiscal Year 2016, is a key mechanism through which Congress 
fulfills one of its primary responsibilities as mandated in 
Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United States, 
which grants Congress the power to ``provide for the common 
defense''; to raise and support an Army; to provide and 
maintain a Navy; and to make rules for the government and 
regulation of the land and naval forces. Rule X of the House of 
Representatives provides the House Committee on Armed Services 
with jurisdiction over the Department of Defense generally and 
over the military application of nuclear energy. The committee 
bill includes the large majority of the findings and 
recommendations resulting from its oversight activities in the 
current year, conducted through hearings, briefings, and 
roundtable discussions with Department of Defense and 
Department of Energy civilian and military officials, 
intelligence analysts, outside experts, and industry 
representatives, and informed by the experience gained over the 
previous decades of the committee's existence.
    Notable events of the last year, including the rise of the 
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, growing instability 
across the Middle East and Africa, and a revanchist Russian 
Federation, are a reminder of the continuing need for U.S. 
military engagement, presence, commitment, and strength to 
defend U.S. interests, deter would-be aggressors, and reassure 
allies and partners. Additionally, with the continued diffusion 
of advanced technology, U.S. military technological superiority 
is no longer assumed and the dominance U.S. forces have long 
enjoyed in the air, sea, space, and cyberspace domains is no 
longer assured. Such a security environment demands that the 
Nation's Armed Forces are agile, efficient, ready, and lethal.
    The bill reflects the committee's steadfast support of the 
courageous, professional, and dedicated men and women of the 
U.S. Armed Forces and the committee's appreciation for the 
sacrifices they make to accomplish their required missions. The 
committee understands that the capabilities of the Armed Forces 
are underpinned by the dedicated civilian employees of the 
Department of Defense and the Department of Energy's National 
Nuclear Security Administration, as well as the defense 
industrial base. Each of these elements is required to enable 
the U.S. military to be the guarantor of peace and economic 
security that it has been for generations.
    In addition to providing the vital funding and authorities 
the Nation's military requires, the bill would implement major 
reforms within the Department of Defense, as the committee 
recognizes the need to get more defense for the dollar 
regardless of the fiscal environment. The bill also seeks to 
provide the funding required to restore the readiness of the 
military; enhance the quality of life of military service 
members and their families; support ongoing military operations 
and U.S. presence in Iraq, Afghanistan, Europe, and elsewhere 
across the globe; sustain and improve the Armed Forces; and 
properly safeguard the national security of the United States.
    While the funding authorized in the bill matches the 
President's request, the committee acknowledges that this level 
has been described by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff 
as the ``lower ragged edge'' of what is necessary. The 
committee believes that defense sequestration must be addressed 
and the committee will continue its bipartisan work to ensure 
that resources provided for the Nation's defense are sufficient 
to protect the safety and security of the American people and 
our vital interests around the world.

Reforming the Department Of Defense

    The committee believes that reform of the Department of 
Defense is necessary to increase the effectiveness and 
efficiency of the defense enterprise to get more defense for 
the dollar. This is necessary to improve the military's agility 
and the speed at which it can adapt and respond to the 
unprecedented technological challenges faced by the Nation. The 
bill reflects the committee's 18 month long comprehensive 
reform effort, which included multiple hearings and briefings, 
as well as consultation with Department of Defense officials, 
outside experts, industry representatives, and other 
stakeholders. While this bill is the first substantive step 
towards comprehensive reform, the committee recognizes that 
instituting lasting reform is a long-term, collaborative 
effort, and therefore, it looks forward to working with all key 
stakeholders to build upon this product.
    In the area of acquisition reform, the bill seeks to inject 
greater flexibility and accountability into the acquisition 
system. It incorporates many of the reform proposals contained 
in the bipartisan bill, H.R. 1597, the Agile Acquisition to 
Retain Technological Edge Act, which was introduced on March 
29, 2015. Many of these proposals have since been adjusted 
based on stakeholder input, prior to inclusion in H.R. 1735. In 
particular, the bill seeks to reform the acquisition system and 
streamline the acquisition process by empowering program 
managers and other Department of Defense decision makers to 
make judgments in the best interests of U.S. troops and the 
taxpayer. It also reforms the Department's development of 
acquisition strategies to include consolidating at least six 
separate reporting requirements into a single, living document 
that would be updated as a program moves through the 
acquisition life-cycle. In addition, it makes the Defense 
Acquisition Workforce Development Fund permanent; requires 
training on the commercial market, including on commercial 
market research; expands ethics training for the acquisition 
workforce; and simplifies the chain-of-command for acquisition 
decisions, reforming a process currently mired in layers of 
bureaucracy.
    In the area of compensation and benefits reform, the 
committee recognizes that an agile military depends on 
recruiting and retaining the best and brightest. More and more 
that means competing with the private sector to bring in or to 
hold onto top talent. To compete effectively, the Department of 
Defense must offer benefits on par with or better than the 
private marketplace. The bill incorporates the work of the 
Military Personnel Subcommittee in implementing many of the 
reforms recommended by the Military Compensation and Retirement 
Modernization Commission. However, the committee is also 
mindful of the potential for unintended consequences, and 
therefore proposes to delay implementation of its legislated 
reforms until 2017 to allow the Department and relevant 
stakeholders time to fully assess and provide feedback on these 
recommendations.
    In the area of organization and management reform, the 
committee shares the concerns expressed by the Secretary of 
Defense and other current and former senior defense officials 
that the Department must do a better job balancing its ``tooth-
to-tail.'' The committee is supportive of efforts by the 
Department to reduce its management headquarters budgets and 
personnel by 20 percent, and recognizes that the Department has 
made some progress towards achieving this goal. The bill would 
therefore require certain reductions in management headquarters 
budgets and personnel, require a baseline from which to hold 
the Department accountable to its reductions, and seek to 
ensure that any reductions are done in a strategic manner, 
preserving key functions and skillsets.
    Lastly, the committee is aware that Congress can often be 
the source of inefficiency in the Department. Thus, H.R. 1735 
would, over the next 6 years, eliminate over 460 
congressionally mandated reports.

Resources for Warfighters and Families

    The committee believes that caring for the troops and their 
families is the cornerstone of readiness. H.R. 1735 would build 
upon the bipartisan work of the Military Personnel Subcommittee 
in providing the troops the benefits they need, deserve, and 
have earned. The committee appreciates the valuable work of the 
Military Compensation and Retirement Reform Commission in 
ensuring that military compensation and benefits continue to 
attract and retain the best and brightest. Of the 15 
recommendations made by the Commission, the bill would act on 
11 of them. However, the committee is mindful of the potential 
for unintended consequences, and therefore proposes to delay 
implementation of some of its legislated reforms until 2017 to 
allow the Department and relevant stakeholders time to fully 
assess and provide feedback on these recommendations.
    One concern raised by the Commission, and shared by the 
committee, is the lengthy backlog of families waiting to take 
advantage of military childcare. It is not evident from 
extensive committee oversight that the backlog is related to 
funding or military construction. The bill would therefore 
direct the Secretary of Defense to cut the backlog in half by 
the end of fiscal year 2017, and to provide a mid-point 
progress report to Congress, as well as require the Comptroller 
General of the United States to examine the adequacy of 
nutrition subsistence programs for military families.
    The committee continues to focus on supporting members of 
the Armed Forces who transition from military service and H.R. 
1735 would establish a Job Training and Post-Service Placement 
Executive Committee within the current Department of Defense-
Department of Veterans Affairs Joint Executive Committee. The 
bill would further direct a joint uniform formulary between the 
Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs 
for medications to treat psychiatric conditions, sleep 
disorders, and pain management to ensure that transitioning 
veterans continue to receive the best care when they leave 
military service.
    The committee recognizes that extended deployments are a 
strain on military families that can be mitigated by visits to 
deployed family members. The Commission noted that current 
Space A regulations only allow for spouses and children to 
visit troops on deployments longer than 120 days. H.R. 1735 
would shorten that time to 30 days.
    Lastly, the committee continues its vigorous oversight and 
protection of military personnel from sexual assault. 
Bipartisan proposals from Members of the committee to improve 
the Special Victims program are reflected in the bill, 
including the expansion of sexual assault prevention training 
to the Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) and Junior ROTC 
programs, access to Special Victims Counsel for civilians who 
are victims of sexual assault, and a requirement for the 
Department to enhance sexual assault prevention for male 
victims in the Armed Forces. The Department would also be 
required to develop a strategy to deal with retaliation against 
those who intervene on behalf of victims.

Readiness, Force Structure, and Support to Ongoing Military Operations

    The committee recognizes that the current threat 
environment is placing growing demands on the U.S. Armed 
Forces, and continues to require the Armed Forces to be called 
upon to support military operations across the globe. In the 
Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, deployed U.S. forces are 
continuing to conduct training and assistance, as well as 
counterterrorism operations, as part of Operation Freedom's 
Sentinel and Operation Resolute Support. In the Republic of 
Iraq and Syrian Arab Republic, deployed U.S. forces are 
participating in coalition operations against the Islamic State 
of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), conducting airstrikes, and 
providing training and assistance to Iraqi security forces and 
vetted moderate Syrian opposition forces as part of Operation 
Inherent Resolve. U.S. forces are also forward-deployed across 
the Greater Middle East to enable these ongoing military 
operations; to enhance the defense of regional allies and 
partners against the ballistic missile, nuclear, and malign 
military activities of the Islamic Republic of Iran; and to 
protect U.S. interests in the region.
    On the Continent of Africa, deployed U.S. forces continue 
to conduct counterterrorism operations and provide training and 
assistance to partners combating violent extremist 
organizations. In Europe, U.S. forces and capabilities have 
been enhanced as part of Operation Atlantic Resolve to deter 
aggression by the Russian Federation and reassure U.S. allies 
and partners in Europe. In Asia, U.S. forces are forward-
deployed to reassure allies and partners concerned about the 
territorial assertiveness and regional intimidation by the 
People's Republic of China and the nuclear and ballistic 
missile capabilities of the Democratic People's Republic of 
Korea. In Central and South America, U.S. forces are providing 
key capabilities to detect and interdict illicit trafficking 
that has driven violence and instability to the southern border 
of the United States. Meanwhile, U.S. forces stationed at home 
are working to maintain force readiness and are defending the 
homeland.
    The committee recognizes that while the Department's 
missions and requirements have increased, its resources have 
not. As the National Defense Panel noted in its July 2014 
report to Congress, ``To lessen risk in an environment that is 
becoming more challenging over time, it is important to err on 
the side of having too much rather than too little.'' Along 
this line, H.R. 1735 would take several steps towards 
preserving the necessary end strength, readiness, and force 
structure to ensure the Armed Forces can continue to meet both 
the operational demands of today and the future. The bill would 
seek to better balance the Department's personnel in the field 
and in management headquarters. Furthermore, it would 
reallocate resources to higher priority programs and provide 
funding to address the Department's shortfalls and unfunded 
requirements.
    In the area of readiness, the bill would fully fund the 
Operation and Maintenance accounts for an 11th carrier and a 
10th air wing, aircraft carrier maintenance reset, ship 
operations, and collective training exercises, which would 
allow for 19 Combat Training Center rotations for Brigade 
Combat Teams. It also would authorize additional Marine Corps 
resources to meet unfunded aviation readiness requirements, 
ensure adequate numbers of mission-capable aircraft, and 
provide additional Air Force training resources for high-demand 
areas such as unmanned systems pilots and joint terminal 
controllers.
    In the area of force structure, H.R. 1735 would preserve 
key capabilities by identifying lower priority areas and areas 
where funding is early-to-need or cost savings have been 
identified. The bill would fully resource and enable Special 
Operations Forces and U.S. Special Operations Command 
activities and programs. It would restore funding for the A-10, 
as the committee recognizes the continued use of the A-10, 
including in support of Operation Inherent Resolve, and the 
unique protective capabilities it provides to Soldiers and 
Marines on the ground. It would also restore funding for the 
EC-130H Compass Call, in recognition of the unique electronic 
warfare capabilities provided by this aircraft.
    The bill would authorize additional strike fighters (F-18s 
for the Navy and F-35Bs for the Marine Corps) and provide 
increased funds for the protection of deployed Apache 
helicopters and to accelerate rotorcraft modernization for the 
Army National Guard. It would reduce the layup time for the 
refit of Navy cruisers to maximize the number of cruisers in 
the fleet, expand the National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund to 
appropriately resource the Ohio-class replacement submarine 
program and maintain a reliable nuclear triad, and reverse the 
Department's proposal to terminate Tomahawk Block IV missile 
production. The bill would also authorize the full amount for 
the Long-Range Strike bomber and KC-46A tanker programs that 
the Air Force can execute in fiscal year 2016. Lastly, it would 
authorize additional funds for National Guard and Reserve 
equipment to address significant equipment shortages.
    While the committee recognizes tough choices have to be 
made in the allocation of limited resources, the committee 
believes it has taken prudent steps to preserve and invest in 
readiness and needed capabilities for the warfighter. However, 
should sequestration-level budget caps remain in effect for 
fiscal year 2016 and beyond, the committee recognizes that even 
harder choices will have to be made. The committee agrees with 
former Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, who testified before 
the committee in March 2014, that ``The result would be a 
military that could not fulfill its defense strategy, putting 
at risk America's traditional role as a guarantor of global 
security and, ultimately, our own security.''

Addressing emerging threats and challenges

    The committee recognizes that it must focus not only on 
addressing current threats, but also on preparing for emerging 
and evolving challenges in an increasingly uncertain global 
security environment, and it must ensure that defense resources 
are balanced between the two objectives. In particular, with 
the continued diffusion of advanced technology, U.S. military 
technological superiority is no longer assumed.
    The committee recognizes that the cyber domain of modern 
warfare continues to grow in scope and sophistication. The 
country has witnessed recent, bold cyber attacks against 
Google, large financial institutions, congressional computer 
systems, and the Pentagon. H.R. 1537 provides for stronger 
cyber operations capabilities, seeks to safeguard U.S. 
technological superiority, and includes incentives to improve 
the sharing of information on threats and defensive measures 
between the defense industrial base and the Department of 
Defense. The bill fully resources and authorizes U.S. Cyber 
Command programs and activities, as well as all Military 
Service cyber programs and Cyber science and technology 
initiatives to enhance a Cyber mission force that defends U.S. 
national security objectives.
    The committee also believes that robust military 
intelligence collection and analysis capabilities are essential 
to ensuring the Department of Defense is postured to address 
current and future threats, is investing in the right 
capabilities, and able to protect its forces in the field. The 
bill would take steps to ensure military intelligence analysis 
remains a priority at the national level and that the 
Department is thinking hard about how it collects and analyzes 
intelligence to support the needs of the Combatant Commanders 
and warfighters. The bill would further direct the Department 
to examine the science and technical intelligence and foreign 
material exploitation work being done by various military 
intelligence organizations, identify redundancies, and make 
changes where necessary.
    The committee remains focused on assuring access to space, 
given the military's dependence on the capabilities provided 
from satellites. Thus, it remains concerned about the 
Department's continuing reliance on Russian-designed rocket 
engines. The bill would authorize an increase in funds for the 
development of a new, U.S. rocket propulsion system and direct 
the Air Force to move faster than it is planning to end 
reliance on Russian rocket engines. It would further take 
actions to promote greater competition within the space launch 
industry.
    Lastly, in the area of missile defense, the bill would 
accelerate the development of a next-generation missile defense 
interceptor; modify the Aegis Ashore sites in Romania and the 
Republic of Poland to provide them with anti-air warfare 
capability for self-defense; provide additional funds for 
Israeli missile defense; and authorize additional funds for an 
East Coast missile defense site to add to the defense of the 
United States, specifically against long-range ballistic 
missiles from the Islamic Republic of Iran.

                                HEARINGS

    Committee consideration of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 results from hearings 
that began on February 3, 2015, and that were completed on 
April 15, 2015. The full committee conducted nine sessions. In 
addition, a total of 16 sessions were conducted by 6 different 
subcommittees.

                           COMMITTEE POSITION

    On April 29, 2015, the Committee on Armed Services, a 
quorum being present, approved H.R. 1735, as amended, by a vote 
of 60-2.

                EXPLANATION OF THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS

    The committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute during the consideration of H.R. 1735. The title of 
the bill is amended to reflect the amendment to the text of the 
bill. The remainder of the report discusses the bill, as 
amended.

            RELATIONSHIP OF AUTHORIZATION TO APPROPRIATIONS

    The bill does not provide budget authority. This bill 
authorizes appropriations; subsequent appropriations acts will 
provide budget authority. However, the committee strives to 
adhere to the recommendations as issued by the Committee on the 
Budget as it relates to the jurisdiction of this committee.
    The bill addresses the following categories in the 
Department of Defense budget: procurement; research, 
development, test, and evaluation; operation and maintenance; 
military personnel; working capital funds; and military 
construction and family housing. The bill also addresses the 
Armed Forces Retirement Home, Department of Energy National 
Security Programs, the Naval Petroleum Reserve, and the 
Maritime Administration.
    Active Duty and Reserve personnel strengths authorized in 
this bill and legislation affecting compensation for military 
personnel determine the remaining appropriation requirements of 
the Department of Defense. However, this bill does not provide 
authorization of specific dollar amounts for military 
personnel.

          SUMMARY OF DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS IN THE BILL

    The President requested discretionary budget authority of 
$604.2 billion for programs within the jurisdiction of the 
committee for fiscal year 2016. Of this amount, $534.2 billion 
was requested for ``base'' Department of Defense programs, 
$50.9 billion was requested for the Overseas Contingency 
Operations requirements covering the entire fiscal year, and 
$19.0 billion was requested for Department of Energy national 
security programs and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety 
Board.
    To comport with the Concurrent Budget Resolution for fiscal 
year 2016, the committee recommends an overall discretionary 
authorization of $604.2 billion in fiscal year 2016. The base 
committee authorization of $515.0 billion is a $0.2 billion 
increase above the levels provided for in the Carl Levin and 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291). The authorization 
provided in Title XV totals $89.2 billion for Overseas 
Contingency Operations, of which $38.3 billion is authorized in 
support of base budget requirements.
    The table preceding the detailed program adjustments in 
division D of this report summarizes the committee's 
recommended discretionary authorizations by appropriation 
account for fiscal year 2016 and compares these amounts to the 
President's request.

                      BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION

    The President's total request for the national defense 
budget function (050) in fiscal year 2016 is $620.2 billion, as 
estimated by the Congressional Budget Office. In addition to 
funding for programs addressed in this bill, the total 050 
request includes discretionary funding for national defense 
programs not in the committee's jurisdiction, discretionary 
funding for programs that do not require additional 
authorization in fiscal year 2016, and mandatory programs.
    The table preceding the detailed program adjustments in 
division D of this report details changes to the budget request 
for all aspects of the national defense budget function.

            DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

                          TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

                                OVERVIEW

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $106.96 
billion for procurement. This represents a $12.36 billion 
increase over the amount authorized for fiscal year 2015.
    The committee recommends authorization of $109.74 billion, 
an increase of $2.76 billion from the fiscal year 2016 request.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
procurement program are identified in division D of this Act.

                       Aircraft Procurement, Army


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $5.68 
billion for Aircraft Procurement, Army. The committee 
recommends authorization of $5.86 billion, an increase of 
$179.8 million, for fiscal year 2016.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
Aircraft Procurement, Army program are identified in division D 
of this Act.

                       Items of Special Interest


AH-64 Apache helicopter multi-year production contract

    The budget request contained $1.4 billion in aircraft 
procurement, Army, for the AH-64 Apache Block IIIA program.
    The committee notes that the AH-64 Apache Block IIIA 
program is increasing production to 64 aircraft in fiscal year 
2016, and that the Army plans to maintain a production rate 
between 52 and 68 aircraft per year in fiscal years 2017-20. 
The committee believes that the production line is now stable 
enough for the Army to pursue a multi-year contract for the 
program, and that such a multi-year contract could potentially 
save over a hundred million dollars over a 5-year period. 
Therefore, the committee encourages the Army to seek 
congressional approval of such a multi-year contract award in 
the fiscal year 2017 budget request.
    The committee recommends $1.4 billion, the full amount 
requested, in aircraft procurement, Army, for the AH-64 Apache 
Block IIIA program.

Armed aerial scout rotorcraft

    The committee understands the Army has an enduring 
requirement for an Armed Aerial Scout (AAS) platform. 
Additionally, the committee is aware that the Army's decision 
to utilize AH-64 Apache Attack helicopters in conjunction with 
current unmanned aerial systems was a recommended course of 
action from the official AAS Analyses of Alternatives. In the 
committee report (H. Rept. 113-446) accompanying the Howard P. 
``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015, the committee directed the Secretary of the Army to 
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services on 
the Army's interim Apache scout implementation plan, as well as 
the concept for the follow-on plan to replace this interim 
solution. Based on the information provided to it, the 
committee continues to have concerns regarding the Army's long-
term strategy to address the AAS requirement.
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to brief 
the House Committee on Armed Services by February 15, 2016, on 
the conclusions and recommendations of the AAS Analysis of 
Alternatives. The committee also expects this briefing to 
address and examine any joint multirole technologies that could 
be implemented as part of an AAS platform. The committee notes 
that the Joint Multirole Technology Demonstration program is 
currently informing the Army's ability to implement potential 
technologies in Future Vertical Lift aircraft.

Army UH-60A to UH-60L conversions for the National Guard

    The budget request contained $46.5 million in Aircraft 
Procurement, Army and $227.9 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Army for 40 UH-60A to UH-60L conversions.
    The committee notes that based on the Army's current budget 
projections that Army National Guard units will not be able to 
replace their aging UH-60A Blackhawk aircraft until the end of 
fiscal year 2023. The committee further notes that this 
timeline depends on three separate Army programs: production of 
new UH-60M helicopters; the UH-60V upgrade program; and the UH-
60A to UH-60L conversion program. The committee supports 
acceleration of all three programs in order to accelerate the 
timeline for replacement of UH-60A helicopters in the Army 
National Guard. Elsewhere in this Act, the committee includes 
legislation that would further explore acceleration options. 
However, the committee also supports action in fiscal year 2016 
to generate additional upgraded UH-60 helicopters. The 
committee understands that the maximum number of UH-60A to UH-
60L conversions in fiscal year 2016 is 48 helicopters.
    The committee recommends $55.4 million, an increase of $8.8 
million, in Aircraft Procurement, Army and $314.6 million, an 
increase of $86.7 million, in Operation and Maintenance, Army 
for 48 UH-60A to UH-60L conversions.

Improved MQ-1C Gray Eagle modifications

    The budget request contained $276.9 million in Aircraft 
Procurement, Army for the MQ-1C Gray Eagle Unmanned Aerial 
System.
    The committee notes that the MQ-1C Gray Eagle Unmanned 
Aircraft System provides critical intelligence, surveillance, 
and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities to combatant commanders. 
The committee understands that the Army has already implemented 
upgrades to modify the current Gray Eagle platform in order to 
provide extended range capabilities. This capability, known as 
the ``Improved Gray Eagle,'' includes significant expansion of 
the fuselage to accommodate larger fuel capacity and additional 
payloads, as well as integration of an improved heavy fuel 
engine to support takeoff at heavier weights. However, 
additional funding is required to upgrade the last 17 legacy 
Gray Eagle aircraft to the Improved Gray Eagle configuration. 
The committee believes the increased endurance of a modified 
Gray Eagle provides combatant commanders greater employment 
options at increased ranges, expanded payload options, and 
improved basing flexibility in support of the Global ISR 
mission.
    The committee recommends $293.9 million, an increase of 
$17.0 million, for improved MQ-1C Gray Eagle modifications.

                       Missile Procurement, Army


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $1.41 
billion for Missile Procurement, Army. The committee recommends 
authorization of $1.49 billion, an increase of $76.0 million, 
for fiscal year 2016.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
Missile Procurement, Army program are identified in division D 
of this Act.

        Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $1.88 
billion for Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, 
Army. The committee recommends authorization of $2.03 billion, 
an increase of $148.6 million, for fiscal year 2016.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army 
program are identified in division D of this Act.

                       Items of Special Interest


Bradley Fighting Vehicles

    The committee is aware that the US Army is working to 
standardize its fleet of Bradley Fighting Vehicles to two 
digital configurations; the M2A3 and the M2A2 ODS-SA. The 
committee understands that the majority of Active Duty and 
National Guard units are equipped with the most advanced 
versions of these vehicles that include digitized fire control 
and communications systems. The committee is aware that two 
units in particular, the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment and the 
Nevada National Guard, as well as several other active duty 
Brigade Engineer Battalions are equipped with the least 
modernized M2A2-ODS variant.
    The committee acknowledges that the Bradley Family of 
Vehicles, to include the M2A2 ODS, M2A2 ODS-SA, and M2A3, share 
the same materiel engineering and construction with no 
differences in protection or survivability and that all three 
variants are deployable for combat. The committee is concerned 
that soldiers in the units M2A2 ODS versions lack the technical 
proficiency necessary to operate the advanced Bradley vehicles 
utilized in combat operations. The committee is concerned that 
this could degrade combat effectiveness and pose additional 
risk to units who deploy with the older Bradley variant.
    The committee understands that the Army provides new 
equipment training for units scheduled to fall-in on equipment 
with unfamiliar capabilities upon deployment to combat theaters 
of operation. The committee also understands that the Army 
maintains a program of record for remanufacturing M2A2-ODS 
Bradley's that ceased production in 2014 and notes that the 
budget request did not include funding to modernize these 
remaining vehicles. As such, the committee directs the 
Secretary of the Army to brief the House Committee on Armed 
Services by February 15, 2016 on what resources would be 
required to maintain the readiness and technical proficiency of 
these units as well as current and long terms plans for 
modernizing the remaining vehicles.

Combat vehicle industrial base management

    The committee notes that as a result of the Budget Control 
Act of 2011 (Public Law 112-25), the Army is in the process of 
reducing its Active Duty end strength to 420,000, unless 
sequestration is resolved. Additionally, the Army will have 
reduced Active Component Brigade Combat Teams (BCTs) from 45 to 
32 by the end of fiscal year 2015. In 2012 the active Army had 
17 Armored BCTs (ABCT), 20 Infantry BCTs (IBCT), and 8 Stryker 
BCTs. Notably, by the end of fiscal year 2015, the Army will 
have reduced active Army ABCTs to 9, nearly half the number it 
had in 2012. The committee notes that the ABCT, which is 
comprised of Abrams tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles, is the 
only full-spectrum force in the Army's force structure. With 
regard to the future utility of armored forces, the committee 
notes that a RAND Corporation report from 2010 concluded that, 
``Heavy forces-based on tanks and infantry fighting vehicles-
are key elements of any force that will fight hybrid enemies 
that have a modicum of training, organization, and advanced 
weapons. Light and medium forces can complement heavy forces, 
particularly in urban and other complex terrain; they do not 
provide the survivability, lethality, or mobility inherent in 
heavy forces. Quite simply, heavy forces reduce operational 
risks and minimize friendly casualties.''
    The committee is encouraged by the restoration of a third 
maneuver battalion in Armored and Infantry BCTs, and notes that 
in the committee report (H. Rept. 109-452) accompanying the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007, the 
committee opposed the Army's original decision to have only two 
maneuver battalions per BCT. The committee remains concerned 
about the reduction of active ABCTs and the Army's ability to 
have sufficient numbers of fully ready active ABCTs to meet 
combatant commander steady state and contingency plan 
requirements. Additionally, the committee has concerns about 
the mobility, protection, and lethality of IBCT, and encourages 
the Army to pursue rapid incremental solutions to address these 
shortfalls.
    In addition to the mix of BCTs, the committee continues to 
need a better understanding of the ramifications to the future 
combat vehicle industrial base capabilities with regard to the 
Abrams tank, Bradley fighting vehicle, Paladin howitzer, 
Hercules recovery vehicle, Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle, and 
the Stryker combat vehicle. The committee commends the Army for 
making positive progress in information collection and analysis 
of long-term sustainment of the combat vehicle industrial base, 
and also its use of the analytical information collected to 
mitigate risk at both the prime and vendor level using 
congressionally appropriated funds. Moreover, the committee 
acknowledges that this information has helped inform the Army's 
position that Foreign Military Sales alone is not sufficient to 
sustain the viability of the combat vehicle industrial base. 
Such a position poses an unacceptable level of risk at both the 
prime contractor and vendor level and Congress has been 
consistently vocal on these risks in previous years.
    The committee supports the Army's decision to accelerate 
the 4th Stryker Double-Vee-Hull conversion and Stryker 
Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) program for Stryker combat 
vehicle, as well as continuing its efforts in ECP production of 
the Bradley fighting vehicle, and M1 Abrams tank, to include 
development of six pilot M1A2 SEP V3. In addition, the 
committee understands that the Army awarded an Engineering 
Manufacturing Development contract for the Armored Multi-
Purpose Vehicle in December 2015, a program the committee has 
encouraged the Army to accelerate for several years. The out-
year funding reflected in the budget request for fiscal year 
2016 indicates a commitment by the Army to move forward with 
the next major technology upgrades for the existing fleet of 
weapon systems that would ensure fielding of the highest 
quality combat vehicles to a smaller force and also sustain the 
fragile industrial base. However, the committee remains 
concerned about the stability of Army modernization funding in 
fiscal year 2017 and beyond given the implications of 
sequestration. In particular, and verified by the Army's 
industrial base analysis, the committee is concerned about the 
viability of select vendor base suppliers, such as the Forward 
Looking Infra-red and transmissions sectors. The committee 
encourages the Army to continue to monitor these two sectors 
closely and to take necessary actions to maintain their 
viability.

Hercules recovery vehicle

    The budget request contained $123.6 million for the M88A2 
improved recovery vehicle program.
    The committee is aware that in order to provide greater 
protection for soldiers, the Army's current and future fleet of 
combat vehicles has grown significantly in weight. As a result, 
the current fleet of M88A1 recovery vehicles is approaching its 
maximum capability, which will be greatly exceeded by the 
future fleet of combat vehicles. The committee notes that the 
M88A2 is the only vehicle that can single-handedly recover a 
main battle tank, and that it was the only vehicle in the 
Islamic Republic of Afghanistan that could recover larger mine-
resistant ambush-protected vehicles. The committee understands 
that the Army has recently increased the M88A2 acquisition 
objective to 933 systems, of which only 825 have been funded 
for procurement through fiscal year 2018. The committee 
supports the Army's decision to pursue a ``pure fleet'' 
strategy. However, the committee believes additional funds are 
needed in order to achieve Army requirements sooner and to 
provide manufacturing workload beyond fiscal year 2016. The 
committee also notes that the M88A2 is on the Army's unfunded 
priorities requirements list.
    The committee recommends $195.6 million, an increase of 
$72.0 million, for the M88A2 improved recovery vehicle program.

M1 Abrams tank fleet configuration

    The committee notes that the M1A2 System Enhancement 
Program (SEP) v2 Abrams tank is the Army's premier ground 
combat system and has demonstrated its value on the 
battlefields of Iraq. Its built-in test system ensures that 
diagnosis and repair are fast and efficient, improving combat 
availability and saving operational costs. Improved digital 
displays provide tank commanders and crews with a better 
understanding of their tank's operational status and their 
situation on the battlefield.
    However, despite the capabilities of the M1A2 SEP v2, the 
committee is aware that the Army maintains two configurations 
of Abrams tanks, and believes that this dual configuration is 
inefficient and increasingly expensive. The committee further 
notes that all Armor Brigade Combat Teams (ABCT) in the active 
component are equipped with M1A2 SEP v2 tanks, but that only 
two out of seven ABCTs in the National Guard are equipped with 
new M1A2 SEP v2 tanks. The other five ABCTs in the National 
Guard, and the three separate Combined Arms Battalions, are 
equipped with less-capable M1A1 Situational Awareness (SA) 
tanks. The committee is also aware that Army schools currently 
provide training solely on M1A2 SEP v2s, meaning that Army 
National Guard soldiers attending an Army armor school are 
trained on M1A2 SEP v2 tanks, which is not the vehicle they 
will operate in their units. Finally, the committee also notes 
that the Army intends to begin fielding a new version of the M1 
Abrams tank, the M1A2 SEP v3, in 2018. The committee 
understands that this tank will be an incremental improvement 
from the M1A2 SEP v2 and retain significant commonality.
    The committee believes that the Army should take advantage 
of upcoming changes to its ABCT force structure to achieve a 
pure fleet of M1A2 SEP v2 tanks across both the active duty 
Army and Army National Guard. The committee believes that 
maintaining only one type of tank in the Army will reduce 
support and training costs, allow better integration the Army 
National Guard, and provide a more capable overall tank fleet 
for the Army. The committee directs the Secretary of the Army 
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services 
by January 30, 2016, on the potential force structure changes 
and production programs necessary to achieve a pure fleet of M1 
Abrams tanks across the Army.

M240 production and industrial base sustainment

    The budget request included $1.4 million for M240 medium 
machine gun modifications.
    The committee is concerned that the budget request for the 
M240 medium machine gun does not provide adequate resources to 
maintain the capability of the industrial base workforce. The 
committee notes the M240 medium machine gun inventory is aging 
significantly. Consistent with previous committee activity 
regarding the need for small arms modernization, the committee 
encourages a general top-line increase for the M240 medium 
machine program across the Future Years Defense Program in 
order to sustain the U.S. small arms industrial base, as well 
as to ensure continued optimal M240 production for the military 
services. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
Army to brief the House Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 
2016, on the Army's long-term sustainment strategy and life-
cycle sustainment plans for the M240 medium machine gun.
    The committee recommends $1.4 million, the full amount 
requested, for M240 medium machine gun modifications.

Modular Handgun System

    The budget request contained $5.4 million for the 
procurement of 7,106 new Modular Handgun (MHS) weapon systems.
    The MHS is projected to be a non-developmental item, 
commercial-off-the-shelf replacement handgun for the current M9 
pistol. The committee understands the MHS is intended to 
provide soldiers with improved lethality, accuracy, ergonomics, 
reliability, durability, and maintainability over current 
systems. The committee has consistently encouraged the military 
services to modernize the current inventory of small arms 
through new procurements, product improvement programs (PIP), 
or dual-path strategies that consist of new procurements and 
PIPs. The committee supports the MHS program, but remains 
concerned over the continued delay in releasing the official 
request for proposals (RFP). The committee understands that the 
Army is still finalizing performance requirements, and that the 
program's schedule is dependent upon final release of the RFP. 
According to notional schedules reviewed by the committee, the 
committee notes that the bid sample test program for the MHS 
could last up to 1 year. Due to the continued delay in 
releasing the RFP, and the extended bid sample test program, 
the committee believes the procurement request for the MHS in 
fiscal year 2016 is ahead of need.
    Therefore, the committee recommends no procurement funding 
for the MHS program due to funding ahead of need and current 
schedule delays.

Small arms production industrial base

    The committee recognizes that a robust and viable small 
arms production industrial base (SAPIB) is essential to the 
long-term sustainment of reliable and capable sources that can 
develop, produce, and maintain military performance 
specifications for small arms parts and components, as well as 
to maintain competitively priced small arms property and 
services for use by the military services. In the interest of 
full and open competition, the Ike Skelton National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-383) 
repealed section 2473 of title 10, United States Code, which 
had required the Department of Defense to only procure certain 
small arms repair parts and components from a limited number of 
industry sources that the Department had identified as 
comprising the SAPIB.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in 
coordination with the senior military services acquisition 
executives, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on 
Armed Services by March 1, 2016, on the current state of the 
SAPIB, as well as on the effect the repeal is having on the 
current SAPIB.

Stryker lethality upgrades

    The budget request contained $74.0 million in Weapons and 
Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army for Stryker modifications and 
$257.1 million in PE 23735A for the Combat Vehicle Improvement 
Program.
    The committee notes that U.S. Army deployments in Operation 
Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom placed a strain on 
the Army's combat vehicle fleet and prompted a significant 
investment in the force protection and survivability of M1 
Abrams tanks, Bradley Fighting Vehicles and the Stryker family 
of wheeled combat vehicles to defeat mines, improvised 
explosive devices and other threats. One notable example is the 
success of the Double V Hull on the Stryker vehicle. The 
committee understands that this necessary investment in vehicle 
survivability did degrade vehicle mobility and may have caused 
the Army to defer investments in vehicle lethality.
    The committee notes that the Army is addressing the 
mobility issues with Abrams, Bradley and Stryker with 
Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) modernization programs that 
are funded in the fiscal year 2016 request. The committee 
understands that the Army is also resourcing lethality 
improvements in later phases of the Abrams and Bradley ECP 
programs. The committee also notes that the Army is interested 
in pursuing lethality upgrades within Stryker Brigades, but has 
not yet resourced these upgrades. The committee understands 
that the Army has an emerging urgent operational requirement 
for Stryker Infantry Carrier Vehicles that have a direct fire 
weapon system. The committee also understands the Army 
initially wants Stryker vehicles with improved lethality to be 
fielded to the 2nd Cavalry Regiment, a Stryker Brigade Combat 
Team forward deployed to Europe, to increase formation 
lethality against threat vehicles and dismounted infantry. The 
committee supports this urgent need and believes the Army 
should continue to pursue lethality upgrades of its Stryker 
Brigade Combat Teams in order to meet combatant commander 
requirements.
    Further, the committee notes that the Stryker lethality 
upgrade program will use existing Stryker chassis that are 
leftover from the Stryker exchange process that creates Double 
V Hull Strykers, which will reduce the cost of the lethality 
upgrades.
    Finally, the committee encourages the Army to conduct 
appropriate live fire testing as soon as possible on any 
potential Stryker survivability enhancements that have the 
potential to improve crew protection and overall vehicle 
survivability.
    The committee recommends $118.5 million, an increase of 
$44.5 million, for Stryker modifications procurement and $292.1 
million, an increase of $35.0 million, in PE 23735A for Stryker 
lethality upgrades.

                    Procurement of Ammunition, Army


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $1.23 
billion for Procurement of Ammunition, Army. The committee 
recommends authorization of $1.22 billion, a decrease of $11.0 
million, for fiscal year 2016.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
Procurement of Ammunition, Army program are identified in 
division D of this Act.

                       Items of Special Interest


Cost assessment of decommissioning lead-based ammunition and associated 
        components

    The committee is concerned about the potential impact the 
Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2601-2629) could have 
on military ammunition and associated components containing 
lead components. Specifically, the committee notes that the 
Toxic Substances Control Act could potentially be used to ban 
conventional lead-based ammunition which would result in 
significant increases in the price of conventional ammunition 
for both ammunition manufacturers and the Department of 
Defense. The committee is aware that the U.S. Army and the U.S. 
Marine Corps are now procuring enhanced performance non-lead 
based 5.56mm and 7.62mm small caliber rounds, which provide 
better performance against soft and hard targets than lead 
rounds. However, the committee notes that the other military 
services still continue to use lead-based small caliber rounds. 
Additionally, the committee notes that other categories of 
conventional ammunition beyond small caliber ammunition contain 
significant amounts of lead-based components and that 
implementation of the Toxic Substances Control Act to ban lead-
based ammunition could have a much broader effect across the 
ammunition enterprise beyond small caliber rounds.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to provide a cost assessment to the House Committee on Armed 
Services by March 1, 2016, that details the costs associated 
with decommissioning lead-based ammunition. The cost assessment 
should consider all Class V supply items, ammunition of all 
types, fuses, detonators, pyrotechnics, propellants, and 
associated component items to include primers.

Joint Hydra 70 guided rocket acquisition strategy

    The committee understands that the Hydra 70 rocket is 
comprised of an unguided rocket system with an M151 
fragmentation warhead and is categorized as an area weapon 
because once launched, the weapon impacts in the general 
direction that it is fired. The committee also understands that 
the Navy and the Marine Corps have been procuring and fielding 
the Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) since 2012. 
The APKWS adds a precision guided system component to the 
existing unguided Hydra rocket system, which provides a low-
cost, low-yield precision guided kill capability against soft 
to lightly armored and hardened targets.
    The committee is aware the Joint Requirements Oversight 
Council has recently re-validated the Army Operational 
Requirements Document for the APKWS, and notes that there is 
also a validated Army operational needs statement (ONS) for 
additional APKWS for use in the Islamic Republic of 
Afghanistan. The committee understands the Army plans to 
leverage the Navy APKWS contract to procure Army APKWS rockets 
to address the ONS. The committee commends the Army for taking 
the necessary actions to rapidly field this capability to 
address an immediate warfighter need; however, the committee 
remains concerned over the absence of a long-term acquisition 
strategy for guided Hydra rockets. The committee is also 
concerned by the Department of Defense's perceived inability to 
field more capable warhead technology with greater lethality 
that could be used on these precision guided rocket systems. 
The committee is aware that such warheads exist and are in 
current inventory.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Army to provide a 
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 
2016, on the Department of Defense's near- and long-term 
acquisition and fielding strategies for precision guided 
rockets and warhead technology.

M3 Multi-role Anti-armor Anti-tank Weapon System

    The budget request contained $7.5 million for M3 Multi-role 
Anti-armor Anti-tank Weapon System (MAAWS) Carl Gustaf High 
Explosive/High Explosive Dual Purpose combat and target 
ammunition and a sub-caliber training system to support annual 
training and maintain a war reserve inventory in accordance 
with the Army's total munitions requirements. The committee is 
encouraged that the Army is finalizing a program of record for 
M3 MAAWS and synchronizing program activities for Type 
Classification of combat and training ammunition, the M3 and 
lightweight M3A1 gun variants, as well as leveraging 
acquisition and logistics functions with U.S. Special 
Operations Command. The committee encourages the Army to 
complete system Type Classification and finalize its training 
sustainment strategy to include annual ammunition requirements, 
as well as virtual training and Multiple Integrated Laser 
Engagement System training requirements for selected bases and 
training centers. To enhance the committee's oversight of this 
important effort, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
Army to brief the House Committee on Armed Services on the 
status of the M3 MAAWS program by October 1, 2015.

Small caliber ammunition industrial base

    The committee is aware of a study commissioned by the 
Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and 
Training to identify issues affecting ammunition production 
capability and recommended steps necessary to sustain a 
financially viable U.S. munitions industrial base. The 
committee commends the Army for previous steps taken, 
especially as it relates to Government-owned, contractor-
operated facilities, to allow plant operators greater 
flexibility in pursuit of commercial and Foreign Military Sales 
which can help sustain this critical industrial base. The 
committee believes additional measures may be required to 
minimize risk and to better optimize army ammunition plant 
(AAP) utilization and reuse. The committee intends to work with 
the Army in assessing and implementing recommendations in the 
report commissioned by the Assistant Secretary of the Army for 
Acquisition, Logistics, and Training. In particular, the 
committee is interested in gaining a better understanding on 
whether the Army should consider establishing a domestic 
production capability of non-standard small caliber ammunition 
for use by coalition nations, as well as assess how AAPs could 
implement more commercially-adopted business practices, such as 
leasing unused property.

                        Other Procurement, Army


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $5.89 
billion for Other Procurement, Army. The committee recommends 
authorization of $5.80 billion, a decrease of $91.0 million, 
for fiscal year 2016.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
Other Procurement, Army program are identified in division D of 
this Act.

                       Items of Special Interest


Army radio modernization

    The committee notes that the schedule for the Manpack radio 
has been delayed. However, the committee continues to support 
the Army's decision to move forward with the competition using 
the currently planned multi-vendor acquisition strategy. In 
addition, the committee continues to support the Army's larger 
vision of a radio marketplace that drives innovation and 
technology improvement over the course of the program. Given 
the investment that the Army has made in the Manpack radio 
program to date and the clear requirements for the Manpack 
radio capability, the committee encourages the Army to meet 
current warfighter requirements as soon as possible. The 
committee also supports moving forward with an accelerated 
competition for both the dismounted and mounted versions of the 
Manpack radio and driving to produce improvements through the 
planned delivery order competition.

Civil Support Team Information Management System

    The committee is aware that the National Guard Bureau 
Weapons of Mass Destruction-Civil Support Teams (CST) currently 
field a system called the CST Information Management System 
(CIMS), to provide a common operating picture, promote 
information-sharing and real-time collaboration in an emergency 
situation, and support the CST mission of assisting and 
advising first responders and facilitating communications with 
other Federal resources. Given that other National Guard Bureau 
forces, such as the Chemical, Biological, Radiological, 
Nuclear, and High explosive Enhanced Response Force Package 
(CERFP) and Homeland Defense Response Force (HRF) units are in 
need of similar capabilities, and in order for these forces to 
effectively communicate and operate during large-scale domestic 
events, the committee encourages the National Guard Bureau to 
expand CIMS to those CERFP and HRF forces.
    Furthermore, the committee believes it is important that 
this CIMS capability increase interoperability and efficiently 
use prior investments to expand and enhance communication 
capability without creating unwarranted redundancy. Therefore, 
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a 
report to the Committee on Armed Services of the House of 
Representatives by November 1, 2015, detailing what steps have 
been taken to date to expand CIMS to CERFP and HRF units, as 
well as what action is planned with regard to the expansion of 
CIMS to CERFP and HRF forces to include timeline, milestones, 
and a detailed description of any other influencing factors.

Mine resistant ambush protected family of vehicles enduring requirement

    The committee commends the military services for retaining 
the most capable mine resistant ambush protected (MRAP) 
vehicles to meet military operational and training needs, as 
well as standardizing the fleet to improve long-term 
sustainment. The committee notes that approximately 8,000 
excess MRAP vehicles will first be offered to other U.S. 
Government entities and then to potential Foreign Military 
Sales (FMS) or excess defense article (EDA) customers. The 
committee understands that if there are no U.S. Government, 
FMS, or EDA claimants, the vehicles will follow approved 
disposition procedures for demilitarization.
    In the committee report (H. Rept. 113-446) accompanying the 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015, the Chief of Staff of the Army was 
directed to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed 
Services on the advisability and feasibility of reusing MRAP 
vehicles as part of current mobile command post modernization 
strategies. The committee received the briefing and remains 
interested in the extent to which the Department of Defense has 
considered options for reuse of MRAP vehicles. The committee 
notes there could be emerging requirements for MRAP vehicles, 
such as fulfilling the requirement for Key Leader vehicles, as 
well as Command and Control vehicles, that may not have been 
fully considered as part of the broader context for the 
Department's long-term tactical wheeled vehicle modernization 
strategy. The committee also notes that since the Department's 
decision to finalize the enduring requirement for MRAP vehicles 
2 years ago, the military services currently face a 
significantly worse global threat environment.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to provide a 
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 
2016, on the following:
    (1) The current and planned disposition of MRAP vehicles 
across the military services' inventory;
    (2) Current mission requirements for MRAP vehicles, to 
include the status of the mobile command post requirement;
    (3) The current guidance relative to the prioritization 
system used for handling excess MRAP vehicles based on threat 
and national interest; and
    (4) A discussion of the relative threat environment, and 
whether the current threat environment would require a new 
review of the current enduring MRAP vehicle requirements.

Personal protective equipment modernization and industrial base 
        sustainment

    The committee has consistently highlighted the critical 
need for modernization of personal protective equipment (PPE). 
In previous legislation, the committee has expressed its 
concern regarding the Department of Defense's long-term 
strategy for PPE industrial base sustainment and has encouraged 
the Department to pursue strategies that would allow for 
sustainment of this critical industrial base through 
modernization efforts. The committee has noted the importance 
of managing PPE programs through a more traditional and 
deliberative approach to requirements generation and 
procurement of PPE systems. The committee continues to 
encourage and recommend a weapon system approach to PPE 
acquisition, in particular body armor, with an established 
procurement line item for PPE. The committee believes this 
would provide for more efficient planning, programming, and 
budgeting for PPE and would create a more stable environment 
for the industrial base to continue to invest in innovation and 
weight reduction technology. Instead of ``reacting'' to urgent 
operational needs, as the Department did in the 2000s during 
the buildups for Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi 
Freedom, the Department and the industrial base would be better 
positioned to respond to any future threat or immediate 
warfighter need through this approach.
    Section 146 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66) required a federally 
funded research and development center to conduct a study to 
identify and assess alternative and effective means for 
stimulating competition and innovation in the personal 
protection equipment industrial base, to include body armor. 
The committee understands this study is now complete and is 
being reviewed by the Department, but regrettably will not be 
delivered to the committee in time for consideration as part of 
the committee's consideration of the current defense 
authorization bill.
    The committee is aware that current body armor demand has 
prompted industry consolidation and restructuring decisions 
that will affect the Department's ability to respond to future 
warfighter requirements. The committee also notes that the 
committee report (H. Rept. 113-113) accompanying the Department 
of Defense Appropriations Act, 2014 required a report 
addressing current capabilities of domestic body armor 
manufacturers to meet future surge requirements, inventory 
requirements, and steps taken by the Department to ensure the 
availability of domestic hard armor manufacturers for body 
armor systems. The committee understands the Department is 
still compiling data to address this reporting requirement, but 
notes that previous capability analysis indicated a minimum of 
two suppliers is needed to achieve surge production and 
maintain competition for the hard armor industrial base. The 
committee encourages the Department to take the necessary 
actions to maintain at least two vendors as part of this 
critical industrial base.

Rough Terrain Container Handler recapitalization

    The committee is concerned that the budget request did not 
include funding for the Rough Terrain Container Handler, a 
system considered vital and critical to Department of Defense 
expeditionary logistics. The committee notes that many of these 
deployed assets may be categorized as combat losses because of 
their high usage and subsequent decreased life expectancy in 
the austere environments of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan 
and the Republic of Iraq. Consistent with current 
recapitalization strategies for the Family of Forklifts to 
account for legacy systems used as left behind equipment, the 
committee encourages the Army to consider funding 
recapitalization of this critical logistics element.

U.S. Army Europe garrison communications

    The committee is concerned about communications security 
shortfalls at U.S. Army Europe (USAREUR) bases, which are in 
many cases using an outdated garrison emergency communications 
platform that does not support multi-party conversations and 
fully secure communications. The committee is particularly 
concerned about how this outdated equipment could hinder a 
fully effective response to a terrorist event or other 
emergency situation on Army bases in Europe. In addition, the 
committee notes that third-party studies, such as one conducted 
by the Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) Crane, have 
recommended that USAREUR standardize and integrate its garrison 
communications infrastructure into a single enterprise 
operation by entering into a joint agreement with U.S. Air 
Forces Europe (USAFE) to utilize their existing, modern, 
Enterprise Land Mobile Radio (ELMR) program. The committee 
recognizes that significant savings may be achieved through a 
joint USAFE-USAREUR ELMR program and that such an effort would 
also support broader Joint Information Environment goals.

                       Aircraft Procurement, Navy


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $16.12 
billion for Aircraft Procurement, Navy. The committee 
recommends authorization of $18.34 billion, an increase of 
$2.21 billion, for fiscal year 2016.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
Aircraft Procurement, Navy program are identified in division D 
of this Act.

                       Items of Special Interest


Airborne electronic attack low band transmitter consolidation

    The budget request contained $23.2 million for airborne 
electronic attack systems, but did not include any funds for 
the low band transmitter consolidation engineering change 
proposal (ECP).
    The committee notes that the Navy's Next Generation Jammer 
(NGJ) program will eventually replace legacy ALQ-99 jammers and 
will be fielded incrementally starting in 2021. The committee 
also notes that the Increment 2 (Inc 2) element of the NGJ 
program, which addresses low band jammer issues, is planned to 
begin fielding later, in 2026. As a result, the committee 
understands that current ALQ-99 low band transmitters will be 
required in the interim. According to Navy program officials, 
ALQ-99 low band transmitters are still in production and a low 
band transmitter consolidation ECP effort can be fielded in 
2019 which leverages significant industry investment, optimizes 
the jammers for the EA-18G Growler, and provides critical 
operational capabilities until the fielding of NGJ Inc 2.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $37.2 million, an 
increase of $15.0 million, for the low band transmitter 
consolidation ECP. The committee expects that these funds would 
be used for production and fielding of low band transmitter 
consolidation ECP installations.

MH-60R and MH-60S service life extension plans

    The budget request contained $995.2 million for procurement 
of MH-60S and MH-60R helicopters.
    The committee notes that production of new MH-60S 
helicopters will end in fiscal year 2015 and that production of 
new MH-60R helicopters will end in fiscal year 2018. The 
committee also notes that the long timeline for the future 
vertical lift program will likely require a service life 
extension program (SLEP) for the MH-60S and MH-60R fleets in 
order to keep the required number of aircraft in service. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to 
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by 
March 1, 2016, that includes a detailed layout of the timeline 
and funding for a potential SLEP program that maintains enough 
aircraft to meet requirements through fiscal year 2030 or 
beyond for the MH-60S and MH-60R helicopter fleets.
    The committee recommends $995.2 million, the full amount 
requested, for the MH-60S and MH-60R helicopters.

MQ-8 Fire Scout

    The budget request contained $120.0 million for MQ-8C Fire 
Scout procurement, of which $44.2 million was for procurement 
of two MQ-8C air vehicles.
    The MQ-8C Fire Scout is a vertical take-off and landing 
unmanned aerial vehicle which provides real-time and non-real 
time intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) data 
to tactical users without the use of manned aircraft or 
reliance on limited theater or national assets. The committee 
notes that the budget request reflects a production quantity 
reduction from five MQ-8Cs per year in fiscal year 2015 to two 
per year for fiscal year 2016, and understands that a 
production quantity of five MQ-8Cs per year is the minimum 
sustaining rate. The committee further understands that 
procurement of five MQ-8Cs per year supports an efficient and 
cost effective production rate, and would mitigate the risk of 
a production break.
    Consequently, the committee recommends $156.0 million, an 
increase of $36.0 million, for MQ-8C Fire Scout procurement for 
an additional three MQ-8C air vehicles.

Reporting of the April 8, 2000, MV-22 mishap at Marana, Arizona

    In the committee report (H. Rept. 112-479) accompanying the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the 
committee noted that subsequent to an April 8, 2000, MV-22 
mishap at Marana Northwest Regional Airport, Arizona, the 
Marine Corps released information on July 27, 2000, regarding 
the MV-22 accident investigation report which caused confusion 
concerning the cause of the mishap by not making a clear 
distinction between the terms ``human factors'' and ``pilot 
error.'' Consequently, the committee encouraged the Commandant 
of the Marine Corps to work with interested committee members 
to further clarify the Marine Corps' public statements about 
the April 8, 2000, MV-22 mishap so that media reporting of this 
accident would more accurately portray the causal factors of 
the accident. Unfortunately, this situation has yet to be fully 
resolved.
    Therefore, the committee encourages the Secretary of 
Defense to publicly clarify the causes of the MV-22 mishap at 
Marana Northwest Regional Airport, Arizona, in a way consistent 
with the results of all investigations as soon as possible.

V-22 for carrier on-board delivery

    The Department of the Navy currently uses the C-2A aircraft 
to perform the carrier on-board delivery (COD) mission, and has 
chosen the V-22 to replace the C-2A for the COD mission. The 
COD mission is the use of aircraft to ferry personnel, mail, 
supplies, and high-priority cargo, such as replacement parts, 
from shore bases to an aircraft carrier at sea.
    The committee supports the Department of the Navy's 
decision to use the V-22 for its COD mission, and notes that 
both the Department of the Navy and the Department of the Air 
Force have had a long-standing program of record to develop and 
procure the V-22 aircraft. The committee further notes that 
both the MV-22 and CV-22 are proven platforms for the both the 
Department of the Navy and the Department of the Air Force.
    The committee believes that the V-22's unique combination 
of speed, range, cargo capacity, and vertical agility will 
transform the way that sea-based logistics are accomplished for 
the COD mission, and carrier strike groups will have more 
flexible options for resupply, while the V-22's direct delivery 
method will allow aviation assets currently used for vertical 
resupply to be used for other missions. The committee 
understands that the Department of the Navy's military utility 
assessment found the V-22 to be an effective, flexible, and 
safe capability to conduct the COD mission, with no adverse 
impact to cyclical flight operations. Accordingly, the 
committee believes that executing the Department of the Navy's 
program of record for the V-22 provides an affordable, low-risk 
acquisition for the future COD mission.

V-22 medical evacuation capability

    The committee notes that the Navy's plan for the next 
generation of Department of the Navy carrier onboard delivery 
(COD) will be performed by the V-22 Osprey. One of the benefits 
of this new platform will be an expanded patient medical 
evacuation (medevac) capability by a non-catapult platform. The 
current COD C-2A aircraft has the capability to transport 
litter patients but this capability is limited due to the G-
forces associated with arrested landings and catapult takeoffs. 
The V-22 vertical takeoff will increase the range of intubated 
patient movement from the current helicopter range and 
catapult-induced G-forces will no longer be a concern for 
patients with orthopedic or neurologic trauma. The committee 
encourages the Department of the Navy to address this mission 
capability by developing a V-22 medevac equipment package. 
Retaining the medevac equipment onboard the carrier could 
potentially allow any COD mission to transition to a medevac 
mission with little pre-mission planning and without major 
impact to outbound cargo or passenger space.

                       Weapons Procurement, Navy


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $3.15 
billion for Weapons Procurement, Navy. The committee recommends 
authorization of $3.23 billion, an increase of $77.8 million, 
for fiscal year 2016.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
Weapons Procurement, Navy program are identified in division D 
of this Act.

                       Items of Special Interest


Joint Standoff Weapon sustainment

    The budget request contained $21.4 million to fund 
termination costs for the Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW) C-1 
program.
    The JSOW C-1 program provides for a standardized medium-
range precision guided glide munition system that can engage 
defended targets from outside the range of standard anti-
aircraft defenses. The committee has concerns about the 
proposed termination of the JSOW C-1 program given the current 
threat environment, as well as current munition inventories. 
The committee is troubled by the lack of analysis supporting 
the proposed termination by the Navy and its associated impacts 
to the industrial base. The committee notes this request 
contradicts budget justification material used as part of the 
President's request for fiscal year 2015. The committee also 
notes that the Chief of Naval Operations has indicated 
potential shortfalls exist for the JSOW C-1 munitions. The 
committee understands that a technical Nunn-McCurdy breach has 
been triggered by the reduction in quantities proposed in the 
request, and encourages the Secretary of Defense to 
expeditiously complete required certifications to continue the 
remaining program.
    The committee is aware there is approximately $2.00 billion 
in Foreign Military Sales (FMS) that are expected across the 
Future Years Defense Program for JSOW C-1 munitions, however 
the committee is concerned about the Navy's position that 
Foreign Military Sales alone would be sufficient to sustain the 
viability of the JSOW munitions industrial base. The committee 
notes FMS cases often take years longer than originally planned 
to materialize and believes the Navy is assuming unacceptable 
levels of risk. The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy 
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services 
by March 1, 2016, on the plan to support continued JSOW 
modernization, to include plans for integration on the F-35 
Joint Strike Fighter, as well as the planned schedule for FMS 
sales.
    The committee recommends $69.2 million, an increase of 
$47.8 million, to help procure additional JSOW C-1 munitions at 
the minimum sustaining rate of 200 per year in fiscal year 2016 
to better sustain the industrial base and mitigate potential 
inventory shortfalls.

Tomahawk Block IV

    The budget request contained $184.8 million in Weapons 
Procurement, Navy for procurement of 100 Tomahawk missiles, 
which is a decrease of 96 missiles below the minimum sustaining 
rate. The budget request also would terminate Tomahawk Block IV 
procurement beginning in fiscal year 2017.
    The committee is concerned by the Secretary of the Navy's 
recommendation to terminate procurement of the Nation's only 
long-range, surface-launched land-attack cruise missile 
production capability prior to finalizing concept development 
of the Next Generation Land Attack Weapon, which is not planned 
to be operationally fielded until 2024 at the earliest. 
Furthermore, the committee is concerned that the capability to 
recertify current inventory Block IV Tomahawk missiles could be 
put at risk if the Secretary of the Navy decides to shutter the 
Tomahawk Block IV production line in fiscal year 2017. In 
addition, the Secretary has not clearly articulated how the 
inventory of long-range cruise missiles will be replenished if 
the current stock of Tomahawk missiles is utilized to fulfill 
test, training, and warfighting requirements between 2016-24. 
The committee is also concerned that the Navy is well below all 
categories of inventory requirements and is discouraged that 
the Navy is only using one category of inventory requirements 
in stating that there is no risk by terminating Tomahawk Block 
IV production in fiscal year 2017.
    Finally, the committee notes that although the fiscal year 
2016 budget request is 96 missiles below the minimum sustaining 
rate, the Secretary has committed to procure 47 Tomahawk Block 
IV missiles in fiscal year 2016 using $45.5 million provided in 
the Overseas Contingency Operations account of the Department 
of Defense Appropriations Act, 2015 (division C of Public Law 
113-235). As a result, the committee understands that an 
additional 49 missiles are required in fiscal year 2016 to meet 
minimum sustaining rate.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $214.8 million, an 
increase of $30.0 million, in Weapons Procurement, Navy for 
procurement of 149 Tomahawk missiles and to reduce risk to the 
Tomahawk missile industrial base. The committee supports 
continuing the minimum sustaining rate of Tomahawk Block IV to 
fully satisfy inventory requirements and bridge transition to 
Tomahawk Block IV recertification and modernization.

            Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $723.7 
million for Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps. 
The committee recommends authorization of $723.7 million, full 
funding of the request, for fiscal year 2016.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps program are 
identified in division D of this Act.

                   Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $16.59 
billion for Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy. The committee 
recommends authorization of $16.27 billion, a decrease of 
$327.2 million, for fiscal year 2016.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy program are identified in 
division D of this Act.

                       Items of Special Interest


Advance procurement for Afloat Forward Staging Base

    The budget request contained no funds for advance 
procurement for an Afloat Forward Staging Base.
    The committee notes that the Administration has programmed 
$661.0 million for a third Afloat Forward Staging Base in 
fiscal year 2017. The committee believes that there will be a 
costly and disruptive industrial production base break between 
the fiscal year 2014 and fiscal year 2017 ships unless advance 
procurement funds for fiscal year 2016 can be allocated for 
long lead-time ship material and component orders that would 
help support a shipbuilder start of construction for this 
required military capability 1 year earlier.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $97.0 million for 
advance procurement for an Afloat Forward Staging Base.

Air and Missile Defense Radar Testing evaluation

    The committee notes that the Navy plans to use the Arleigh 
Burke-class destroyers (DDG 51) hull form as the platform for 
the Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR), which will provide 
integrated air and ballistic missile defense capability for the 
fleet. The committee further notes that the Director of 
Operational Test and Evaluation has disagreed with the Navy's 
plans for AMDR testing and believes that in order to achieve 
full end-to-end test results, testing must be performed aboard 
the self-defense test ship. Considering the central role that 
AMDR and DDG 51 Flight III will play in sea-based ballistic 
missile defense and the magnitude of the Navy's planned 
investment, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees by March 1, 2016, as to the potential use of 
AMDR on the self-defense test ship. This report should include, 
but is not limited to, an analysis of the following:
    (1) Maturity of AMDR and the Navy's plans for developing, 
testing, and integrating AMDR, to include a cost benefit of 
performing AMDR testing aboard the self-defense test ship 
versus a manned ship;
    (2) Risks associated with the Navy's planned acquisition 
strategy for the DDG 51 class and AMDR; and
    (3) Any additional items the Comptroller General deems 
relevant to the report.

Amphibious ship construction

    The budget request contained no funds for advance 
procurement associated with the replacement amphibious warship 
(LX(R)).
    The committee notes that the Secretary of the Navy, the 
Chief of Naval Operations, and the Commandant of the Marine 
Corps have agreed to support the LX(R) as a derivative of the 
LPD 17 San Antonio-class hull form. The committee also notes 
that the fiscal year 2016 budget submission from the Department 
of the Navy continues investment in the nation's amphibious 
warship fleet with the completion costs anticipated for LPD 28. 
The committee supports the Navy's initiative to use an existing 
hull form and commends the Navy on efforts to decrease costs 
and reduce schedule. However, the committee is concerned that 
the Navy shipbuilding plan does not take advantage of the 
efficiencies and subsequent cost avoidance inherent in 
maintaining an active industrial base for construction of 
vessels utilizing the LPD 17 hull form. The committee believes 
that the optimum construction start for the LX(R) class of 
vessels is in fiscal year 2018 rather than the current Navy 
program of record of fiscal year 2020.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $250.0 million in 
advance procurement for amphibious vessels in Shipbuilding and 
Conversion, Navy, for investment in engineering design and 
planning, and long lead time equipment including propulsion, 
steering and electrical generating equipment, air conditioning 
plants, castings, and other items necessary to move 
construction start of the first LX(R) vessel to fiscal year 
2018.

Coast Guard polar icebreaker

    The committee notes that the United States Coast Guard 
initiated a new project for the design and construction of a 
new polar icebreaker in fiscal year 2013, but the timing and 
execution of this project have become uncertain. The project 
received $7.6 million in the Department of Defense, Military 
Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Full-Year Continuing 
Appropriations Act, 2013 (Public Law 113-6), $2.0 million in 
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 (Public Law 113-76), and 
no funding in fiscal year 2015. The budget request for fiscal 
year 2016 requests $4.0 million to continue initial acquisition 
activities for the ship. A new polar icebreaker is projected to 
cost between $900 million to $1.10 billion.
    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) approved a 
Mission Need Statement for the polar icebreaker 
recapitalization project in June 2013. The MNS states, ``This 
Mission Need Statement (MNS) establishes the need for polar 
icebreaker capabilities provided by the Coast Guard, to ensure 
that it can meet current and future mission requirements in the 
polar regions. . . . Current requirements and future 
projections based upon cutter demand modeling, as detailed in 
the HLMAR [High Latitude Mission Analysis Report], indicate the 
Coast Guard will need to expand its icebreaking capacity, 
potentially requiring a fleet of up to six icebreakers (3 heavy 
and 3 medium) to adequately meet mission demands in the high 
latitudes. . . .''
    The committee believes that the administration has 
inadequately valued the necessity to procure required 
icebreaking capacity. The committee believes the failure to 
acquire all domain access capability in polar regions 
expeditiously may irreparably harm Department of Defense 
national security missions, and may leave the Department in 
which the Coast Guard is operating unable to meet its 
anticipated future responsibilities related to maritime safety 
and security, search and rescue, environmental response, and 
fishery law enforcement. The committee supports the use of 
Department of Defense authorities and acquisition expertise to 
acquire required icebreaking capabilities. The committee is 
supportive of interim leasing authority to meet short- and mid-
term icebreaking requirements to include the use of section 
2401 of title 10, United States Code, leasing authority and 
other such leasing authorities resident in the Department in 
which the Coast Guard is operating. The committee encourages 
the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Defense 
to develop a plan to acquire all domain access capability in 
polar regions expeditiously. Such a plan should address both a 
bridging strategy to cover the period between the end of the 
useful life of the USCGC Polar Star and the construction of a 
new medium or heavy icebreaker.

Joint High Speed Vessel Build Specification

    The committee notes that appropriations for an additional 
Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV) was provided in the Consolidated 
and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (Public Law 
113-235) and the Secretary of the Navy is negotiating an award 
for the construction of that ship. The committee also notes the 
JHSV is a growing part of the fleet and is now included in the 
count of the Battle Force ships. In order to ensure the Navy 
realizes the benefits associated with the cost efficiencies 
gained in building the first ten JHSVs and avoids any schedule 
delays in the delivery of the eleventh ship to Fleet, the 
committee encourages the Secretary of the Navy, to the maximum 
extent possible, to grant any waivers to regulatory or 
statutory changes that have been instituted since the award of 
the original JHSV contract. Therefore, the committee directs 
the Secretary of the Navy to prepare a brief to the Committee 
on Armed Services of the House of Representatives by October 1, 
2015 on efforts to continue the regulatory and statutory 
changes that were in effect for the first 10 JHSVs with the 
additional JHSV 11.

National Defense Sealift Fund

    The committee notes that the National Defense Sealift Fund 
(NDSF) was created by the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 102-484) to address sealift 
funding issues using a revolving fund concept. Since its 
inception, the committee notes that NDSF has been successfully 
used to support multiple procurements and has a legacy of 
success in supporting U.S. shipbuilding interests.
    Therefore, the committee recommends the transfer of $674.2 
million for the Navy TAO(X) Oiler Shipbuilding Program from the 
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy account to the National 
Defense Sealift Fund, Navy account.

Naval electric weapons systems fielding plan

    The committee is aware that the Navy has been pursuing 
development and operational demonstration of a number of 
electric weapons systems, including both directed energy 
systems and electromagnetic railguns. This class of electric 
weapons has the potential to provide revolutionary new 
capabilities for Navy platforms, including increased range, 
increased safety, and deeper magazines than conventional 
weapons. The committee believes that such systems will be 
important in the future to counter cost-imposing strategies in 
an anti-access environment where swarms of low-cost weapons 
could be used to overwhelm higher-cost, limited numbers of 
defensive weapons. However, as the Navy continues to pursue 
increasing power and decreasing size for such weapons, the 
committee believes that the Navy should also be considering how 
to field and integrate such systems into future naval platforms 
in order to facilitate successful transition from the 
laboratory to the fleet.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy 
to develop a plan for fielding electric weapon systems within 
the Department of the Navy for both the current and future 
fleet, and to provide a briefing on the results of this plan to 
the House Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 2016. As part 
of this plan, the Secretary of the Navy shall detail proposals 
for the allocation of the requisite power and space for the 
fielding of electric weapons systems, such as the Laser Weapons 
System, electromagnetic railgun, or other similar systems 
currently in development for the current and future fleet.

Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine replacement

    The Navy's Ohio-class replacement program is intended to 
replace the current fleet of existing Ohio-class ballistic 
missile submarines. The Navy plans to procure 12 submarines to 
replace the 14 existing Ohio-class submarines, at an estimated 
total program cost of over $95.00 billion in fiscal year 2015 
dollars. The Navy plans to begin procuring the lead ship in the 
class starting in fiscal year 2021, with detail design planned 
for 2017. The Navy has recognized that given the investment 
requirements associated with the Ohio-class replacement 
program, it will face serious resource challenges starting in 
fiscal year 2020. The Navy is currently in the early design 
phase of this program and is investigating various cost 
reduction efforts, such as an early reduction of requirements 
and ongoing efforts to identify mature technologies that can be 
leveraged from other submarine and ship programs. The 
Government Accountability Office has reported in the past on 
the importance of attaining key knowledge early in shipbuilding 
programs in order to reduce the risk of future cost growth and 
schedule delays.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to provide a report to the congressional 
defense committees by March 1, 2016, on the Ohio-class 
replacement program, which should include the following 
specific elements:
    (1) The feasibility of the Navy's planned technical 
approaches to meeting identified performance requirements;
    (2) The maturity of the technologies identified for the 
Ohio-class replacement, including the development of a new 
nuclear reactor;
    (3) The status of prototyping efforts to reduce technical 
risk in advance of lead ship construction;
    (4) The readiness and capacity of the industrial base to 
design and build the submarines and the availability of any 
unique materials necessary for submarine construction; and
    (5) Any risk in the Navy's planned acquisition strategy for 
the class.

Shipbuilding and industrial base

    The committee remains concerned about the health of the 
non-nuclear surface combatant industrial base. While the Navy 
public shipyards are expanding to meet significant workload 
increases associated with the growth of unplanned Nimitz-class 
carrier work and the nuclear undersea warfare industrial base 
is programmed to increase their capacity with the introduction 
of the Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine replacement 
program beginning in fiscal year 2019, the committee notes that 
a limited shipbuilding and conversion Navy account may 
disproportionately and irrevocably impact the non-nuclear 
surface combatant industrial base. Some of these non-nuclear 
surface combatant industrial base partners are reviewing 
significant reductions in the workload unless a concurrent 
increase in their work effort is programmed. The committee 
notes that the continued ship design and construction of LPD-
28, continued construction of two Arleigh Burke-class 
destroyers and three Littoral Combat Ships, and the advance 
procurement associated with Afloat Forward Staging Base and the 
replacement amphibious warship (LX(R)), will serve to partially 
mitigate the dearth of workload programmed at the non-nuclear 
surface combatant shipyards; but the committee believes that a 
significant infusion of additional naval focus in ship 
construction is necessary to sustain the current industrial 
base.
    The committee notes that the administration has offered a 
number of initiatives to help mitigate this shortfall including 
an innovative contracting method that places certain amphibious 
and auxiliary ships under a contract to better sustain the 
industrial base.
    The committee believes that continued long-term, multiyear 
procurement and block buy contracts are integral to sustaining 
the overall industrial base. The committee has provided a 
multitude of such authorities for a variety of these ship 
classes to sustain this effort and provide a stable industrial 
base. The committee encourages the Department of the Navy to 
continue innovative contracting efforts and workload agreements 
that focus on the non-nuclear surface combatant industrial base 
to ensure its long-term health and viability as a national 
security asset.

USS John F. Kennedy two-phase acquisition strategy

    The committee notes that the Secretary of the Navy has 
prepared a two-phase acquisition strategy to support the 
delivery of the USS John F. Kennedy (CVN 79) that would be 
concurrent with the inactivation of the USS Nimitz (CVN 68). 
This strategy would complete the hull, mechanical and 
electrical construction work (phase I) and then after a planned 
incremental availability, would install relevant shipboard 
combat systems and electronics during another availability 
(phase II). The Navy has indicated that this two-phase 
acquisition strategy will reduce construction costs, increase 
flexibility in the schedule, provide an opportunity to install 
a lower-cost radar solution, and preempt required obsolescence 
management in the first planned incremental availability. The 
committee is concerned, however, that this two-phase strategy 
may unnecessarily extend the USS John F. Kennedy fleet 
induction timeline by 18 months and increase costs as a result 
of extended overhead and inflationary losses.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy 
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees by 
March 1, 2016, about the two-phase acquisition strategy. The 
report shall include an assessment of conducting the proposed 
phase II work concurrent with the phase I USS John F. Kennedy 
effort, and assess the cost and inflationary implications 
associated with the proposed and concurrent work options.

Virginia Payload Module

    The committee notes the retirement of the Ohio-class guided 
missile submarine in the 2020s will cause a significant 
shortfall in the strike capacity of the undersea forces. In 
response to the pending retirement of these guided missile 
submarines, the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) 
supported the inclusion of a Virginia Payload Module (VPM) to 
partially offset the strike loss.
    The committee supports the JROC determination to 
incorporate VPM into the Virginia-class submarine, but is 
concerned that the introduction period of VPM be based on a one 
per year build strategy during the 2020s. The committee notes 
that the tables accompanying the 30-year shipbuilding plan 
include a Virginia-class build rate that varies between one and 
two per year during the 2020s. The committee is perplexed by 
the Navy decision to not incorporate VPM into every Block V 
Virginia-class submarine and believes that this inconsistent 
build rate suboptimizes the overall development of this 
important capability.
    The committee supports the expeditious development of this 
capability consistent with the delivery of every Block V 
Virginia-class submarine.

                        Other Procurement, Navy


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $6.61 
billion for Other Procurement, Navy. The committee recommends 
authorization of $6.72 billion, an increase of $111.5 million, 
for fiscal year 2016.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
Other Procurement, Navy program are identified in division D of 
this Act.

                       Items of Special Interest


Aegis refurbishment and ship modernization

    The committee notes that the Department of the Navy has a 
significant challenge associated with the modernization of the 
destroyer and cruiser force structure. Specifically, the 
software and hardware configurations for the Aegis weapon 
system of the in-service destroyers and cruisers are challenged 
to keep pace with current and future threats. The plethora of 
over ten Aegis software baselines and inability to focus 
modernization efforts undermine the Navy's large surface 
combatants' relevancy through their expectant service lives. 
The committee supports options to improve the capability of the 
in-service Aegis fleet by updating the Aegis computer program 
configurations of the ships to an Integrated Air and Missile 
Defense (IAMD) capability to include refurbishing and 
modernizing the SPY-I radar hardware of the ships. The 
committee believes computer program updates are cost effective, 
performance-enhancing ways of deploying the proven Aegis Common 
Source Library across the Flight I, II and IIA destroyers, to 
include reusing existing computing equipment where prudent to 
reduce cost and increase operational availability. There is 
also operational utility in merging legacy anti-air warfare and 
ballistic missile defense Aegis computer programs aboard Flight 
I and II destroyers.
    With respect to the SPY-I radar improvements, the committee 
also believes that a multitude of options are available to the 
Navy that should provide improvements to sensor coverage, raid 
capacity, flexibility in ship stationing, and target 
discrimination, including hardware changes, that can be 
accomplished pier-side in order to reduce cost and increase 
operational availability. Finally, in order to reduce cost and 
increase operational availability, the committee is supportive 
of Aegis hardware changes that do not considerably alter 
current ship configuration (i.e. deckhouse design) and that can 
be accomplished within acceptable margins for space, weight and 
power and cooling.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Chief of Naval 
Operations and the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to 
prepare a report to the congressional defense committees not 
later than 120 days after the date of enactment of the act:
    (a) An overview of the Aegis in service options that are 
being considered to modernize Aegis computer program 
configurations and SPY-I radar hardware;
    (b) For each option being considered in (a), the report 
shall include the cost and implementation data associated with 
each option; affordability and risk assessments; and any other 
supporting analyses the Chief of Naval Operations and the 
Director of the Missile Defense Agency consider appropriate.

Air and Missile Defense Radar

    The committee understands that the Navy Air and Missile 
Defense Radar (AMDR) is designed to be fully scalable and 
modular to support a variety of shipboard radar applications on 
a variety of platforms. The committee further understands that 
the flexibility in the design of AMDR could also provide the 
foundation for land based applications.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to provide a 
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by February 
1, 2016, on the Department of the Navy's plan to utilize the 
AMDR investment across existing and future platforms in the 
fleet. The briefing shall also include options that the 
Secretary is considering to exploit AMDR scalability in other 
service radar acquisitions to realize greater affordability 
through economies of scale.

Destroyer modernization

    The budget request contained $364.2 million in Other 
Procurement, Navy for destroyer modernization.
    The committee notes that one destroyer combat system 
modernization, valued at $60.0 million, was eliminated in the 
budget request and that a total of five destroyer 
modernizations were eliminated across the Future Years Defense 
Program. The committee is concerned that the Secretary of the 
Navy has applied insufficient resources toward modernization 
efforts and that a dearth of capabilities will result when 
compared against needed capabilities outlined in the most 
recent Navy Force Structure Assessment.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $424.2 million, an 
increase of $60.0 million, for an additional destroyer 
modernization.

Littoral Combat Ship simulation training

    The committee notes the significant cost savings, increase 
in fidelity of training, and improved operational readiness 
rates that are achievable through the use of game-based 
immersive virtual ship training environments (IVSE), as is 
being developed for the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS). The 
committee also notes that the Navy intends to delay funding for 
this LCS courseware developments that may provide near-term 
efficiencies and longer-term operational cost-savings.
    The committee believes that IVSE is integral to initial 
training initiatives and concurrency training in order to 
ensure mission readiness for the crews of the LCS squadron. The 
committee also believes IVSE may not only expand the LCS multi-
mission training profile, but that it may also provide 
opportunities for expansion to aircraft maintenance and other 
vessel training. The committee would support opportunities that 
expand IVSE mission training to additional platform training 
programs that may include aviation, surface, and subsurface 
operation and maintenance virtual training environments.

Radar Obsolescence and Availability Recovery Upgrades

    The budget request contains $11.757 million for Radar 
Obsolescence and Availability Recovery upgrades to convert one 
AN/SPS-48E radar system to the AN/SPS-48G configuration on 
aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships. The committee 
notes that, since its inception in 2005, Navy officials have 
repeatedly cited this upgrade program as a high priority, as 
the AN/SPS-48G configuration allows for operations under 
dynamic threat conditions, improves operational availability, 
and reduces ownership costs. The committee further notes that 
part of this plan's effectiveness has been the ability to order 
and execute three kits per year, providing a better price for 
the Navy and coinciding with planned servicing schedules for 
the fleet.
    The committee is concerned that the reduction from three 
AN/SPS-48G kits to one kit in fiscal year 2016 will increase 
the unit cost of this program and delay the availability of 
this upgrade throughout the fleet. Therefore, the committee 
directs the Secretary of the Navy to brief the Committee on 
Armed Services of the House of Representatives not later than 
August 31, 2015 as to: (1) the unit cost impact due to a 
reduction from three AN/SPS-48G units to one as proposed in the 
Fiscal Year 2016 budget request; (2) the approximate date at 
which the Navy anticipates completing its upgrade to the AN/
SPS-48G radar at rates of one unit per year versus three units 
per year; and (3) any capability gaps and vulnerabilities to 
large surface combatants due to using the legacy AN/SPS-48E 
radar instead of the AN/SPS-48G. This report may contain a 
classified annex.

                       Procurement, Marine Corps


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $1.13 
billion for Procurement, Marine Corps. The committee recommends 
authorization of $1.16 billion, an increase of $37.5 million, 
for fiscal year 2016.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
Procurement, Marine Corps program are identified in division D 
of this Act.

                       Items of Special Interest


Garrison Mobile Engineering Equipment

    The budget request contained $1.4 million for procurement 
of Garrison Mobile Engineering Equipment.
    The committee understands this program procures commercial 
construction and engineering equipment, such as graders, 
backhoes, cranes, and other construction equipment. The 
committee notes that the Marine Corps has initiated a program 
for precision upgrades for Garrison Mobile Engineering 
Equipment that would consist of competitively awarded contracts 
to upgrade current systems with global positioning system grade 
control systems and laser-leveling survey sets. The committee 
understands these upgrades could provide for better 
performance, reduced time to conduct missions, and fuel 
savings, as well as reduce Marine construction engineers' 
exposure to enemy fire in combat conditions. The committee 
believes additional investment for these precision upgrades 
would provide for improved capability for current engineering 
equipment, and provide for increased force protection for 
deployed Marine construction engineers. The committee 
encourages the Marine Corps to continue to invest in this 
capability portfolio.
    The committee recommends $1.4 million, the full amount of 
the request, for procurement of Garrison Mobile Engineering 
Equipment.

                    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $15.65 
billion for Aircraft Procurement, Air Force. The committee 
recommends authorization of $15.94 billion, an increase of 
$290.5 million, for fiscal year 2016.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force program are identified in 
division D of this Act.

                       Items of Special Interest


A-10 aircraft

    The committee notes that the Department of the Air Force 
plans to retire 164 A-10 aircraft in fiscal year 2016. For 
fiscal year 2015, the Department of the Air Force proposed the 
retirement of 100 A-10 aircraft and in H.R. 4435, the Howard 
P.``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015, as reported by the House Committee on Armed 
Services, the committee included a provision that would 
prohibit the use of funds authorized to be appropriated for the 
Department of Defense to be obligated or expended to retire A-
10 aircraft. The committee notes that since last year, A-10 
aircraft have been deployed for combat in Operation Inherent 
Resolve and to Europe as part of theater security packages. The 
committee continues to believe that the capabilities provided 
by the A-10 including persistent, effective, and precise close 
air support; interdiction; airborne forward air control; combat 
search and rescue; and strike control and reconnaissance, are 
critical to meet national security requirements. The committee 
further notes that with the proposed retirement of the 164 A-10 
aircraft in fiscal year 2016, the Department expects to be 181 
fighter aircraft short of its 2,000-aircraft fighter 
requirement, and the committee believes that retiring 164 A-10 
aircraft in fiscal year 2016 presents an unacceptable capacity 
risk.

Air National Guard wildfire assistance

    The committee notes that the U.S. Global Change Research 
Program has determined that the frequency of large wildfires 
and the length of the fire season have increased substantially 
in recent decades. The committee acknowledges that the U.S. 
Geological Survey Federal Fire Occurrence Database indicates 
that the occurrences of catastrophic wildfires in the United 
States are more prevalent in the western half of the country. 
Air National Guard units flying C-130 aircraft equipped with 
Modular Airborne Firefighting System (MAFFS) have been an 
integral part of wildfire suppression, saving not only property 
but lives. The committee acknowledges that as catastrophic 
wildfires continue to grow in severity, it is important to 
provide the assistance of our Air National Guard. The committee 
believes that MAFFS should be located in positions that 
maximize the effectiveness of MAFFS units consistent with the 
highest probability of risk for the United States.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to prepare a brief to the House Committee on Armed 
Services by September 1, 2015 that assess the locations of C-
130 MAFFS units. Such a briefing should provide a listing of 
the current United States Air Force units, their utilization 
rates, and a future force allocation determination that most 
efficiently utilizes the MAFFS units. This briefing shall 
specifically assess opportunities to expand coverage of MAFFS 
units in the western United States.

Air refueling recapitalization strategy

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense 
continues to develop a long-range plan to replace the KC-10 
Extender and KC-135 Stratotanker fleets with the KC-46A 
Pegasus, as well as the KC-Y and KC-Z programs. The committee 
strongly reiterates the importance of maintaining our nation's 
robust air-refueling capability in a current fiscal environment 
that has required our forces to be more agile and rapidly 
deployable. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of 
the Air Force to brief the Committee on Armed Services of the 
House of Representatives by September 30, 2015 on the Air 
Force's long-range air refueling recapitalization plans, 
including the Air Force's strategy to meet air refueling 
demands specific to the Asia-Pacific area of responsibility.

Battlefield airborne communications node

    The committee notes that the Department of the Air Force's 
battlefield airborne communication node (BACN) program was 
developed to meet critical communications needs and was fielded 
through rapid acquisition authorities to support urgent 
operational requirements. The committee further notes that BACN 
continues to act as a critical communications and data relay 
system, flying on EQ-4B and E-11A aircraft not only in support 
of Operation Freedom's Sentinel, but also throughout the U.S. 
Central Command's area of responsibility and elsewhere in 
support of operational requirements.
    In the committee report (H. Rept. 113-446) accompanying the 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015, the committee encouraged the Secretary of 
the Air Force to transition BACN to a traditional program of 
record. The committee remains concerned that the potential 
decline of Overseas Contingency Operations funding in the 
future and no clear plan to transition BACN to a traditional 
program of record may place the program at risk, and that 
previous investments as well as operational experience may be 
lost. Therefore, the committee encourages the Secretary of the 
Air Force to develop a plan to transition BACN to a base budget 
program of record in order to meet current operational needs, 
as well as anticipated future requirements across theaters to 
ensure that this capability is maintained in the Department of 
the Air Force for the long-term.

C-130 modernization plan

    The budget request contained $8.5 million for procurement 
of C-130 modifications but included no funds for the T-56 3.5 
engine modification or for the C-130 eight-bladed propeller 
upgrade. The T-56 3.5 engine modification lowers fuel 
consumption, improves performance, and improves engine life, 
and the eight-bladed propeller upgrade improves the thrust of 
the C-130's engine.
    In the committee report (H. Rept. 113-446) accompanying the 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015, the committee expressed a concern that 
the Department of the Air Force has not been taking actions to 
ensure that the C-130H aircraft fleet is being upgraded with 
modifications that address obsolescence, diminishing 
manufacturing sources, and increased operations and sustainment 
costs. The committee notes that for fiscal year 2016, the C-
130H modernization program includes a center wing box 
replacement program and a program to address certain airspace 
compliance concerns. The committee supports this modernization 
program and encourages the Air Force to address cockpit 
modifications required to mitigate obsolescence and diminishing 
manufacturing sources. The committee believes that a 
comprehensive program should be developed to ensure that the C-
130H has a service life through 2040 as currently planned.
    The committee notes that the report of the 2014 Quadrennial 
Defense Review states that the Department of the Air Force will 
maintain 300 combat-coded C-130H and C-130J aircraft in the 
tactical airlift fleet inventory to support requirements and 
the objectives of the 2012 Defense Strategic Guidance. The 
committee further notes that the Department plans to divest C-
130 aircraft in the Future Years Defense Program so that the 
tactical airlift fleet is reduced to 308, and the committee 
believes that the Department of the Air Force inventory of C-
130 aircraft should not be less than 308 aircraft.
    To provide for improved C-130H propulsion performance, 
reliability, and efficiency, the committee recommends $71.7 
million for C-130 modifications, an increase of $33.2 million 
for the T-56 3.5 engine modification and an increase of $30.0 
million for the C-130 eight-bladed propeller upgrade.

C-130H modernization

    The committee is encouraged that the Chief of Staff of the 
Air Force has proposed a plan that finally addresses the 
committee's longstanding concern for the modernization of C-
130H aircraft that reside primarily in the National Guard and 
Reserve components of the Department of the Air Force. The 
Department of the Air Force has briefed the committee on 
multiple occasions on a new plan, which is being referred to as 
the Avionics and Modernization Program (AMP) Increments 1 and 2 
that appears to address many of the committee's concerns. 
However, the committee remains concerned that the plan's 
timeline for implementation may still leave some C-130H 
aircraft non-compliant with future airspace requirements and 
still susceptible to increased diminishing manufacturing 
sources (DMS) and obsolescence issues. Specifically, the 
proposed timeline proposes to complete certain Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA) compliance concerns by 2022, two years 
after FAA direction, requiring non-compliant aircraft to seek 
waivers or limit flight operations. Additionally, the AMP 
increment 2 only supports eight aircraft modernizations per 
year which also does not appear to support a fleet viability 
requirement.
    The committee supports an acceleration of the modernization 
effort both in terms of meeting FAA compliance by the 2020 
deadline and acceleration of the increment 2 modernization 
plan. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to submit a report on the implementation of C-130H AMP 
Increments 1 and 2 to the congressional defense committees by 
March 1, 2016. At a minimum, this report should address:
    (1) The timeline for implementation of both AMP Increments 
1 and 2;
    (2) An assessment to accelerate AMP Increment 1 to ensure 
all C-130H aircraft are compliant with all airspace 
requirements by 2020 to include the possibility of using 
existing contracting offices such as the Rapid Acquisition 
Office to accelerate these upgrades;
    (3) An assessment to accelerate the build rate for AMP 
Increment 2 in order to address future DMS and obsolescence 
issues; and
    (4) Any plans for recapitalization of Air National Guard 
and Air Force Reserve C-130 aircraft.
    The committee understands that the Department of the Air 
Force will require additional resources to begin implementing 
this new plan and therefore recommends $10.0 million for C-130 
AMP, an increase of $10.0 million.

EC-130H Compass Call aircraft

    The budget request contained $68.4 million for EC-130H 
Compass Call aircraft modifications. The EC-130H Compass Call 
aircraft is the Department of the Air Force's wide-area 
coverage airborne electronic attack and offensive counter 
information weapon system. The EC-130H counters adversary 
communications, information processing, navigation, radar 
systems, and improvised explosive devices.
    The committee notes that the EC-130H Compass Call aircraft 
has demonstrated a powerful effect on enemy command and control 
networks in multiple military operations, including in the 
Republic of Kosovo, Republic of Haiti, Republic of Panama, 
Republic of Iraq, Republic of Serbia, and Islamic Republic of 
Afghanistan, and is consistently in demand with all unified 
commands. However, due to fiscal constraints, the committee 
further notes that the Department of the Air Force plans to 
divest 8 of its 16-aircraft fleet of EC-130H Compass Call 
aircraft in fiscal year 2016. The committee believes that 
divesting eight EC-130H Compass Call aircraft would present 
unacceptable risk to ongoing and future combat operations. The 
committee notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff included the 
restoration of eight EC-130H Compass Call aircraft among his 
unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2016.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $97.1 million, an 
increase of $28.7 million, for EC-130H Compass Call aircraft 
modifications.

F-15 and F-16 spare engine shortfall

    In the committee report (H. Rept. 113-446) accompanying the 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015, the committee expressed concern with the 
Department of the Air Force's shortfall of up to 24 spare F-100 
engines for F-16 and F-15 aircraft. The committee notes that 
the Department of the Air Force has yet to take any action to 
mitigate this shortfall and remains concerned that the 
Department has not allocated the funds necessary to fulfill the 
validated engine shortfall in the F-15 and F-16 fleets. The 
committee understands that the production line for these 
engines will begin to close in early fiscal year 2017, and that 
as a result, the Department of the Air Force has little time 
remaining to procure the engines. With these aircraft expected 
to continue to play a key role in the Air Force until the F-35 
is fielded in sufficient numbers, the committee is concerned 
about the Department's ability to address engine requirements 
without action on this issue. Therefore, the committee 
encourages the Department of the Air Force to evaluate the 
possible utility of a reprogramming request to procure at least 
some of the 24 engines needed to meet validated spare engine 
requirements.

F-16 block 40/50 mission training center

    The budget request did not contain any funds for other 
aircraft support equipment and facilities, or for the 
procurement of an F-16 block 40/50 mission training center for 
the Air National Guard.
    An F-16 block 40/50 mission training center (MTC) is a 
distributed mission operations-capable flight simulator for F-
16 block 40 and 50 weapons systems. Each MTC includes high-
fidelity simulator cockpits, instructor operator stations, a 
threat server, and briefing and debriefing capability. Each MTC 
is also capable of linking to geographically distributed high-
fidelity combat and combat support training devices including 
command and control and intelligence, surveillance, and 
reconnaissance systems. This capability allows the warfighters 
at home station to exercise and train at the operational and 
strategic levels of war, as well as conduct networked unit-
level training. The committee notes that the F-16 block 40/50 
MTC allows F-16 block 40 and block 50 pilots to train in 
scenarios that are either impossible or too expensive to 
conduct in home-station flying training, and believes that the 
MTC significantly improves F-16 pilot skill and readiness to 
perform actual combat missions with increased effectiveness.
    The committee understands that F-16 block 40/50 MTCs are 
currently planned for Hill Air Force Base (AFB), Shaw AFB, and 
Holloman AFB in the continental United States. The committee 
further understands that other F-16 block 40 or 50 pilots 
located in the continental United States would need to travel 
to one of the three MTC locations, and believes an additional 
MTC would save travel costs and make the F-16 block 40/50 MTC 
more available to Active Duty, Reserve, and Air National Guard 
F-16 block 40 and 50 pilots, resulting in enhanced readiness.
    Consequently, the committee recommends $24.7 million for 
other aircraft support equipment and facilities, an increase of 
$24.7 million, for procurement of an additional MTC for the Air 
National Guard.

F-35 aircraft program

    The F-35 aircraft program is the largest acquisition 
program within the Department of Defense, with a current 
planned procurement of 2,443 aircraft for the Department of the 
Navy and the Department of the Air Force to meet fifth 
generation U.S. fighter requirements. The committee continues 
to strongly support the requirement for fifth generation 
fighter aircraft due to projected increases in the 
effectiveness and quantities of threat anti-aircraft ground 
systems and adversary aircraft and their associated air-to-air 
weapons. The committee believes that without advanced fifth 
generation aircraft, the United States may be significantly 
limited in its ability to project power in the future.
    The committee notes that the Department of the Navy 
anticipates a strike fighter aircraft shortfall of about 134 
aircraft in 2020, with an average shortfall of about 100 
aircraft between fiscal years 2015 and 2020. Due to the 
constraints of the decreased budget authority contained in the 
Budget Control Act of 2011 (Public Law 112-25), the committee 
notes that the Department of the Navy has deferred 16 F-35C 
aircraft out of the Future Years Defense Program, and believes 
that this deferral will result in a higher strike fighter 
shortfall, as well as a reduction in strike fighter 
capabilities. The F-35C is also planned for an 8,000-hour life 
span, which is 33 percent longer than legacy aircraft, and the 
committee believes that the F-35's longer life should also help 
improve the strike fighter shortfall. Accordingly, the 
committee urges the Department of the Navy to restore the 16 F-
35Cs deferred in this budget request when it submits the budget 
request for fiscal year 2017. The committee also notes that the 
Commandant of the Marine Corps has included an additional six 
F-35Bs among his unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2016, and 
elsewhere in this Act, the committee recommends an increase for 
this purpose and believes that this increase will also help 
alleviate the Department of the Navy strike fighter shortfall.
    The F-35 program is approximately 60 percent through its 
flight test program, which is planned to be completed in the 
first quarter of fiscal year 2018. At a hearing held by the 
House Committee on Armed Services' Subcommittee on Tactical Air 
and Land Forces on April 14, 2015, the F-35 program executive 
officer testified that the F-35 program is making solid and 
steady progress on all aspects of the program. The committee 
notes that the F-35 program executive officer has identified 
the software development for the final development software 
block, known as block 3F, as an area with some risk remaining 
which could result in a 4- to 6-month delay in delivery of 
software block 3F, but that this delay will not affect the 
Department of the Navy's initial operational capability for the 
F-35C in 2018. The committee continues to monitor software 
progress. Also at the hearing on April 14, 2015, the F-35 
program manager mentioned the F-35's F135 engine as a 
challenging area subsequent to the June 23, 2014, engine fire 
and failure at Eglin Air Force Base, and noted that the program 
has yet to identify a long-term repair for this engine failure. 
The committee shares this concern and consequently recommends a 
provision that would require the Secretary of Defense to enter 
into a contract with a federally funded research and 
development center to conduct an assessment of the F135 engine 
program, including a thorough assessment of the F135 engine 
failure, and to submit a report containing such assessment by 
March 16, 2016. The committee further notes that at the hearing 
held on April 14, 2015, the F-35 program manager testified that 
the price of F-35s have continued to decline with each 
successive lot. The committee remains pleased with these price 
reductions, and discussions with F-35 program officials suggest 
that the budget request for procurement of F-35s is slightly 
higher than required for procurement of the F-35s in fiscal 
year 2016. Accordingly, elsewhere in this Act, the committee 
recommends reductions to each of the three variants to account 
for lower than anticipated costs when these aircraft are 
procured.
    The committee has also identified funds for development of 
the future block 4 modifications which could be reduced for 
fiscal year 2016, and discussions with F-35 program officials 
revealed that some of the funds requested for development of 
the block 4 modification are excess to need for fiscal year 
2016. Therefore, elsewhere in this Act, the committee 
recommends reductions for the block 4 development program. The 
committee does not intend for these reductions to affect the 
development of the F-35 dual-capable aircraft.

Joint surveillance and target attack system sustainment report

    The E-8C aircraft was developed for ground surveillance, 
targeting, and battle management. Air battle managers onboard 
the E-8C joint surveillance target attack radar system (JSTARS) 
aircraft use its wide-area ground surveillance radar to build 
situation awareness and identify targets which are passed to 
strike assets or cross-cued with other intelligence, 
surveillance, and reconnaissance platforms.
    The committee notes that the Department of the Air Force 
plans a JSTARS recapitalization program which would replace the 
aging E-8C aircraft with a modern, more efficient, and capable 
aircraft and mission systems, with an initial operational 
capability of 2023 and a full operational capability in 
subsequent years. Until the JSTARS replacement aircraft attains 
full operational capability, the committee believes that the 
current E-8C JSTARS aircraft will require a modest amount of 
sustainment funding, especially to address the issue of 
diminishing manufacturing sources.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees by February 15, 2016, which describes all actions 
required to avoid degradation to the performance of the E-8C 
radar and fleet, each upgrade required to meet minimum 
warfighter requirements for combat operations and to pace 
evolving threats during this period, and the Secretary's plan, 
schedule and budgets to accomplish this objective between 
fiscal years 2016 and the time that the JSTARS replacement 
aircraft achieves full operational capability.

KC-10

    The committee notes that in executing any possible long-
term KC-10 divesture strategy, the Department of Defense must 
ensure that the nation's aerial refueling capabilities are not 
placed at risk by ensuring critical mission taskings remain 
unfilled. The committee also notes specifically that to meet 
current and future threats and missions, the unique KC-10 
capability to execute a strategic air bridge must not be 
compromised, whether an Arctic, Pacific, or transatlantic air 
route. The committee strongly reiterates the importance of 
maintaining our nation's robust aerial refueling capability in 
the current fiscal environment that requires our forces to be 
more agile and rapidly deployable.

KC-46A quarterly report

    The committee supports the current acquisition strategy 
associated with the KC-46A aircraft. Therefore, the committee 
directs the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 
Technology, and Logistics to discontinue the quarterly 
reporting associated with the KC-46A aircraft required in the 
committee report (H. Rept. 112-78) accompanying the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012.

RQ-4 and U-2 high-altitude intelligence, surveillance, and 
        reconnaissance capabilities

    Over the past 3 years, the committee has supported 
retaining both the RQ-4 Global Hawk Block 30 and U-2 Dragon 
Lady for the high-altitude intelligence, surveillance, and 
reconnaissance (ISR) mission. The committee notes that the 
Department of the Air Force has determined that Global Hawk 
operating costs have decreased while the Global Hawk Block 30 
fleet has flown an increased number of hours compared to 
previous years in support of the combatant commanders.
    While the committee was pleased that the Air Force 
requested funding for both the RQ-4 Global Hawk Block 30 and 
the U-2 in the budget request for fiscal year 2016, the 
committee is concerned about the possibility that the 
Department of the Air Force still plans to retire the U-2 fleet 
in fiscal year 2019. While the committee realizes that the 
Department can never fully meet the ISR demand of combatant 
commanders, reasonable and necessary ISR requests appear very 
likely to go unfilled if the current high-altitude airborne ISR 
collection capabilities of the U-2 are terminated. The 
committee also notes that section 133 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81) 
limits the retirement of U-2 aircraft until equal or greater 
ISR capability is available to commanders of the combatant 
commands.
    Finally, the committee supports the Department of the Air 
Force efforts to upgrade the Global Hawk Block 30 aircraft to 
meet the requirements of the combatant commanders, but notes 
that this will take several years. In light of the known gaps, 
the committee has concerns with any plan that will leave the 
combatant commanders with less overall capacity and capability 
than they have today.

UH-1N replacement program

    The budget request contained $2.5 million for the UH-1N 
replacement program.
    The UH-1N replacement program would replace the Department 
of the Air Force UH-1N fleet of 62 aircraft by acquiring a non-
developmental commercial or U.S. Government vertical lift 
aircraft. The committee understands that the current 47-year-
old UH-1N aircraft fleet fails to meet speed, range, payload, 
and defensive system requirements, and that modifications to 
the existing fleet will not enable the UH-1N to meet mission 
requirements. Accordingly, the committee believes the UH-1N 
replacement program is timely. The committee notes that the 
Department of the Air Force is currently assessing requirements 
for the UH-1N replacement, conducting market research, and 
developing UH-1N replacement acquisition alternatives. The 
committee further notes that the Department of the Air Force 
has selected the HH-60W for its combat rescue helicopter, and 
believes that procurement of currently produced UH-60Ms for the 
UH-1N replacement could provide significant commonality with 
the HH-60W, reducing procurement and life-cycle costs.
    The committee recommends $2.5 million, the full amount of 
the request, for the UH-1N replacement program.

                  Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $1.75 
billion for Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force. The committee 
recommends authorization of $1.73 billion, a decrease of $20.0 
million, for fiscal year 2016.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force program are identified in 
division D of this Act.

                     Missile Procurement, Air Force


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $2.98 
billion for Missile Procurement, Air Force. The committee 
recommends authorization of $2.98 billion, full funding of the 
request, for fiscal year 2016.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
Missile Procurement, Air Force program are identified in 
division D of this Act.

                      Other Procurement, Air Force


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $18.27 
billion for Other Procurement, Air Force. The committee 
recommends authorization of $18.29 billion, an increase of 
$22.9 million, for fiscal year 2016.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
Other Procurement, Air Force program are identified in division 
D of this Act.

                       Items of Special Interest


Air Force Fire Emergency Services and Personal Protective Equipment

    The committee understands the most recent contract award 
for Air Force Fire Emergency Services (FES) Personal Protective 
Equipment (PPE) was canceled in its entirety due to the need 
for the Air Force to take corrective action under a Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) protest. Therefore, the committee 
directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide a briefing to 
the House Committee on Armed Services by July 1, 2015 that 
details the current acquisition strategy for Air Force FES PPE. 
The briefing should provide the justification for how the Air 
Force determined that the Defense Logistics Agency Fire and 
Emergency Services Equipment Tailored Logistics Support Program 
contract does not meet the requirements of the Air Force and 
discuss why the Air Force made the determination for setting 
aside for small business manufacturing meets the requirements 
of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 19.502-2(b).

Civil engineers construction, surveying, and mapping equipment

    The budget request contained $9.1 million for base procured 
equipment. Of this amount, no funds were requested for 
modernization of equipment used by base civil engineer units or 
Red Horse squadron (RHS) engineer units.
    Red Horse squadrons provide the Air Force with a highly 
mobile civil engineering response force to support contingency 
and special operations worldwide. The committee understands 
current civil engineer equipment has been discontinued for 
approximately 5 years and maintenance requirements for this 
legacy equipment could potentially be cost prohibitive. The 
committee notes that to date, 66 percent of existing equipment 
is known to be discontinued, with some individual components 
ranging as high as 94 percent. The committee is aware that the 
Air Force Civil Engineer Center, Operations Directorate (AFCEC/
CO) is considering a long-term replacement and modernization 
strategy for legacy equipment and software across the Future 
Years Defense Program, and notes the AFCEC/CO has identified an 
urgent unfunded requirement to support the initial 
modernization strategy for modern civil engineering equipment. 
The committee believes additional funds would help to 
accelerate the modernization of legacy civil engineering 
equipment. The committee expects these funds would be obligated 
under full and open competition to provide the best-value 
equipment to Air Force base civil engineer units and RHS units.
    The committee recommends $13.1 million, an increase of $4.0 
million, to competitively procure modernized engineer equipment 
and address any unfunded requirements.

                       Procurement, Defense-Wide


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $5.13 
billion for Procurement, Defense-Wide. The committee recommends 
authorization of $5.26 billion, an increase of $132.4 million, 
for fiscal year 2016.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
Procurement, Defense-Wide program are identified in division D 
of this Act.

                       Items of Special Interest


Procurement of Standard Missile-3 block IB interceptors

    The budget request included $548.9 million for procurement 
of Standard Missile-3, block IB interceptors (including 
canisters and advanced procurement funding).
    The committee is aware of the significant demand amongst 
the combatant commanders for inventory of the Standard Missile-
3 block IB missile interceptor. The committee is also aware 
that because of recent flight and ground test challenges, the 
Department of Defense has decided to focus on continuing 
initial lot procurement of block IB missiles in fiscal year 
2016 and focusing on multi-year procurement, advanced 
procurement, and full rate production in subsequent years.
    The committee has concerns about continuing procurement of 
block IB interceptors before resolution of the current 
technical uncertainties, though the committee notes that the 
planned flight tests of the block IB missile to prove out the 
technical fix will occur before any missiles procured in fiscal 
year 2016 would actually be delivered to the Missile Defense 
Agency. The committee has also been assured that the Missile 
Defense Agency will not take delivery of fiscal year 2015 
procurement block IB interceptors until the fix has been proved 
out by flight test.
    The committee is also troubled that the technical 
challenges in the block IB program are leading to a higher 
price per unit for missiles the combatant commanders need. The 
committee expects the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to 
negotiate for the lowest possible per unit price, and to ensure 
all appropriate contractual remedies are used to offset the 
costs of these challenges.
    The committee recommends $521.6 million, a decrease of 
$27.3 million, for procurement of Standard Missile-3, block IB 
interceptors (including canisters). The committee notes that 
elsewhere in this Act, additional funding is recommended for 
Aegis BMD testing related to the block IB proof of concept.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations


              Section 101--Authorization of Appropriations

    This section would authorize appropriations for procurement 
at the levels identified in section 4101 of division D of this 
Act.

                       Subtitle B--Army Programs


 Section 111--Limitation on Availability of Funds for AN/TPQ-53 Radar 
                                Systems

    This section would limit the obligation or expenditure of 
25 percent of the funds for AN/TPQ-53 radar systems until 30 
days after the date on which the Assistant Secretary of the 
Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology submits to the 
congressional defense committees a review of the current 
delegation of acquisition authority to the Program Executive 
Officer for Missiles and Space.

  Section 112--Prioritization of Upgraded UH-60 Blackhawk Helicopters 
                       within Army National Guard

    This section would require the Chief, National Guard Bureau 
to issue guidance within 180 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act that prioritizes UH-60 helicopter 
upgrades within the Army National Guard to those units with the 
highest flight hour aircraft and highest utilization rates. 
This section would also require the Chief to submit a report to 
the congressional defense committees within 30 days after 
issuing such guidance that describes such guidance.

  Section 113--Report on Options to Accelerate Replacement of UH-60A 
              Blackhawk Helicopters of Army National Guard

    This section would require the Secretary of the Army to 
submit a report to the congressional defense committees by 
March 1, 2016, containing detailed options for the potential 
acceleration of the replacement of all UH-60A helicopters of 
the Army National Guard.

                       Subtitle C--Navy Programs


   Section 121--Modification to Multiyear Procurement Authority for 
         Arleigh Burke Class Destroyers and Associated Systems

    This section would amend section 123(a) of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-
239) and provide authority to the Secretary of the Navy to 
enter into a multiyear contract for a Flight III destroyer, in 
addition to the existing multiyear authority for a Flight IIA 
destroyer.
    The committee supports the changes proposed by the 
Secretary of the Navy to integrate the Air and Missile Defense 
Radar in the Arleigh Burke class destroyer and the inclusion of 
the Flight III guided missile destroyer into the current 
multiyear authority. However, the committee is concerned about 
the Secretary of the Navy's strategy to implement an 
Engineering Change Proposal to fundamentally change integral 
elements of the Arleigh Burke class destroyer multiyear 
procurement without congressional authorization. When the 
initial multiyear procurement was authorized by section 123 of 
Public Law 112-239, the authorization was limited to an 
``Arleigh Burke class Flight IIA guided missile destroyer.'' 
The committee includes this provision because it believes that 
implementation of a Flight III destroyer without an explicit 
congressional authorization would violate section 123 of Public 
Law 112-239, by constituting a cardinal change in the scope of 
the initial authorization.

    Section 122--Procurement Authority for Aircraft Carrier Programs

    This section would provide economic order quantity 
authority for the construction of two Ford class aircraft 
carriers and incremental funding authority for the nuclear 
refueling and complex overhaul of five Nimitz class aircraft 
carriers.

                     Subtitle D--Air Force Programs


    Section 131--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Executive 
           Communications Upgrades for C-20 and C-37 Aircraft

    This section would limit the obligation and expenditure of 
funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available 
for fiscal year 2016 to upgrade the executive communications of 
C-20 and C-37 aircraft unless the Secretary of the Air Force 
certifies in writing to the congressional defense committees 
that such upgrades do not cause such aircraft to exceed any 
weight limitations or reduce the operational capability of such 
aircraft. This section would also allow the Secretary of the 
Air Force to waive the limitation if the Secretary determines 
that such a waiver is necessary for the national security of 
the United States and notifies the congressional defense 
committees of such waiver.

         Section 132--Backup Inventory Status of A-10 Aircraft

    This section would require that the Secretary of the Air 
Force not move more than 18 A-10 aircraft in the Active 
Component to backup flying status pursuant to an authorization 
made by the Secretary of Defense under section 133(b)(2)(A) of 
the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291). 
This section would also make a conforming amendment to section 
133(b)(2)(A) by striking ``36'' and inserting ``18''.

 Section 133--Prohibition on Availability of Funds for Retirement of A-
                              10 Aircraft

    This section would prohibit funds authorized to be 
appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal 
year 2016 for the Department of the Air Force to be obligated 
or expended to retire, prepare to retire, or place in storage 
any A-10 aircraft, before December 31, 2016, except as provided 
by section 132; would require the Department of the Air Force 
to maintain a minimum of 171 A-10 aircraft designated as 
primary mission aircraft inventory; and would prohibit the 
Secretary of the Air Force from making any significant 
reductions to manning levels with respect to any A-10 aircraft 
squadrons or divisions before December 31, 2016. This section 
would also require the Secretary of the Air Force to commission 
an appropriate entity outside the Department of Defense to 
conduct an assessment by September 30, 2016, of the required 
capabilities or mission platform to replace the A-10 aircraft 
and submit a report on that assessment to the congressional 
defense committees.

       Section 134--Prohibition on Retirement of EC-130H Aircraft

    This section would prohibit funds authorized to be 
appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal 
year 2016 for the Department of the Air Force to be obligated 
or expended to retire, prepare to retire, or place in storage 
or on back up flying status any EC-130H aircraft. It would 
require the Secretary of the Air Force to commission an 
assessment of the required capabilities or mission platform to 
replace the EC-130H aircraft, and to submit a report on that 
assessment to the congressional defense committees not later 
than September 30, 2016. Additionally, this section would 
prohibit the Secretary of the Air Force from retiring, 
preparing to retire, placing in storage or placing on back up 
flying status any EC-130H aircraft until 60 days after the 
Secretary submits the report on an assessment of the required 
capabilities or mission platform to replace the EC-130H 
aircraft.

  Section 135--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Divestment or 
                       Transfer of KC-10 Aircraft

    This section would prohibit funds authorized to be 
appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal 
year 2016 for the Department of the Air Force to be obligated 
or expended to divest or transfer, or prepare to divest or 
transfer, any KC-10 aircraft.

       Subtitle E--Defense-wide, Joint, and Multiservice Matters


   Section 141--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Joint Battle 
                           Command--Platform

    This section would require the Assistant Secretary of the 
Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology to submit a 
report by March 1, 2016, to the congressional defense 
committees that addresses the effectiveness, suitability, and 
survivability shortfalls of the joint battle command--platform 
equipment identified by the Director of Operational Test and 
Evaluation in the Director's fiscal year 2014 annual report to 
Congress. This section would further limit the obligation or 
expenditure of 25 percent of the funds for the joint battle 
command--platform until 30 days after the Assistant Secretary 
submits such a report.

Section 142--Strategy for Replacement of A/MH-6 Mission Enhanced Little 
         Bird Aircraft to Meet Special Operations Requirements

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a strategy to the congressional defense committees not 
later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act 
for the replacement of the A/MH-6 Mission Enhanced Little Bird 
aircraft to meet requirements particular to special operations 
for future rotary-wing, light attack, reconnaissance 
requirements.

 Section 143--Independent Assessment of United States Combat Logistic 
                           Force Requirements

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
enter into an agreement with a federally funded research and 
development center to conduct an assessment of the anticipated 
future demands of the combat logistics force ships of the Navy 
and the challenges these ships may face when conducting and 
supporting future naval operations in contested maritime 
environments. This section would also require the Secretary of 
Defense to submit the assessment to the congressional defense 
committees by April 1, 2016.

   Section 144--Report on Use of Different Types of Enhanced 5.56mm 
              Ammunition by the Army and the Marine Corps

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
provide a report to the congressional defense committees by 
March 1, 2016, regarding the current use of two different types 
of 5.56mm ammunition in combat by the Army and the Marine 
Corps. The report shall include, but not be limited to, the 
following: (1) an explanation of the reasons for the Army and 
the Marine Corps current use of different 5.56mm combat 
ammunition; (2) an explanation of the appropriateness, 
effectiveness, and suitability issues that may arise from the 
use of these two types of ammunition; (3) an explanation of any 
additional costs that have resulted from the use of two 
different types of 5.56mm combat ammunition by the two 
services, if any; (4) an explanation of the future plans, if 
any, of the Army or the Marine Corps to eventually transition 
back to using one standard 5.56mm combat ammunition round; and 
(5) if no such plans exists, an analysis of the potential 
benefits of a transition back to a common 5.56mm combat round 
in the future, including how long such a transition may take to 
occur.
    The committee understands that the Army and the Marine 
Corps have proceeded on different paths to upgrade 5.56mm 
ammunition in terms of both soft tissue damage and penetration 
of certain hard materials. As a result, the Army and the Marine 
Corps currently use different 5.56mm ammunition in combat, with 
the Army using the M855A1 round and the Marine Corps using the 
Mk318 Mod 0 round. The committee notes that the military 
services appear to have different requirements and a different 
perspective on the utility of the two rounds. As a result, the 
small arms ammunition logistics system has to maintain two 
separate, incompatible inventories of 5.56mm ammunition. In 
addition, the committee believes there may be additional costs 
to the Department of Defense in procuring two types of 
ammunition rather than just one, which it had been doing before 
2009. While the current inventory levels of the two rounds is 
substantial, with the Marine Corps having more than two million 
in stock, this section is intended to encourage the Department 
to develop a plan to get back to one standard 5.56mm combat 
round.

         TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

                                OVERVIEW

    The budget request contained $69.77 billion for research, 
development, test, and evaluation. This represents a $6.09 
billion increase over the amount authorized for fiscal year 
2015.
    The committee recommends $68.35 billion, a decrease of 
$1.42 billion to the budget request.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
research, development, test, and evaluation program are 
identified in division D of this Act.

           Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army


                                Overview

    The budget request contained $6.91 billion for research, 
development, test, and evaluation, Army. The committee 
recommends $7.02 billion, an increase of $105.5 million to the 
budget request.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
research, development, test, and evaluation, Army program are 
identified in division D of this Act.

                       Items of Special Interest


Acoustic mixing technology for energetic materials

    The committee understands that the Army currently uses low-
frequency, high-intensity sound waves, in a technology called 
``acoustic mixing'' during the manufacturing of some munitions. 
The committee understands acoustic mixing technology is 
currently being used at McAlester Army Ammunition Plant (MCAAP) 
where a 5-gallon capacity acoustic batch mixer is being 
employed to produce munitions boosters at a cost savings of 
$1,000 per unit. The U.S. Air Force demand for this product is 
2,500 per month, which should result in an equipment payback of 
less than 6 months. The committee notes that MCAAP has embraced 
acoustic mixing technology with the intent of utilizing it to 
further exploit its usefulness, further increase productivity, 
as well as environmental and safety improvements at their 
facilities.
    The committee believes this technology could have broader 
applications and could have the potential to improve industrial 
efficiency and productivity throughout the Department of 
Defense munitions enterprise. The committee encourages the 
Secretary of the Army to continue to evaluate and refine 
acoustic mixing technology capabilities.

Active protection system

    The budget request contained $55.4 million in PE 63005A for 
combat vehicle and automotive advance technology, which 
includes funding for Active Protection System (APS) research 
and development.
    The committee is encouraged that funding for APS research 
and development was included in the fiscal year 2016 budget 
request. In the committee report (H. Rept. 113-102) 
accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2014, the committee noted that a lack of investment could 
soon create a critical capability gap for Army combat vehicles 
due to the rapid proliferation of advanced anti-tank guided 
missiles and next-generation rocket propelled grenades. The 
committee notes that there are numerous types of APS available, 
including some that have already been fielded on operational 
vehicles in other countries and have performed well in recent 
demonstrations. It is crucial the Army keeps momentum going in 
this important effort; therefore, the committee encourages the 
Army to establish a program of record to ensure APS is 
integrated into the Army's combat and tactical vehicle 
platforms as soon as practicable based on technology 
development and funding. In addition, the committee directs the 
Secretary of the Army to provide a briefing to the House 
Committee on Armed Services by January 31, 2016, that includes 
a description of all currently planned and budgeted activities 
that are related to active protection systems.
    The committee recommends $55.4 million, the full amount 
requested, in PE 63005A for combat vehicle and automotive 
advance technology.

Advanced tactical shelters

    The committee is aware that the Department of Defense Joint 
Committee on Tactical Shelters has identified emerging 
requirements for current and future advanced tactical shelters. 
Among those is a requirement to provide antimicrobial 
protection for tactical medical shelters, as well as for 
protection from the adverse effects of electromagnetic 
interference and electromagnetic pulse (EMI/EMP). Further, the 
committee is aware of an emerging technology process called 
cold spray which has the potential to address these two 
requirements. Cold spray has proven effective in the 
application of copper-based alloys onto touch surfaces in order 
to protect against microbial infection in field hospitals. 
Similarly, cold spray technology provides a non-destructive 
process, currently unavailable through traditional joining 
methods, for sealing aluminum joint panels in tactical 
shelters, thereby reducing EMI/EMP leakage and infrared 
signature, as well as improving energy efficiency. The 
committee encourages the Department to continue development of 
advanced materials and materials processing approaches such as 
cold spray to attempt to meet these requirements.

Army airborne networking radios

    The budget request contained $12.9 million in PE 65380A in 
research, development, test, and evaluation, Army for the 
Airborne, Maritime, Fixed Station (AMF) Joint Tactical Radio 
System (JTRS). Of this amount, $6.8 million was requested for 
the Small Airborne Link 16 Terminal (SALT) and $6.2 million was 
requested for the Small Airborne Networking Radio (SANR).
    The committee supports continued fielding of network 
capability to Army airborne systems. The committee notes with 
concern that both the SALT and SANR programs have been delayed 
by 3 years, with milestone C now scheduled for fiscal year 
2019. The committee believes that delay in procurement of next-
generation radios for the aerial network tier will require the 
Army's airborne platforms to rely on legacy waveforms. As a 
result, airborne assets will not be able to leverage the 
terrestrial network or an airborne network for increased 
situational awareness or connectivity. The committee notes that 
the Army is examining interim, competitively awarded, solutions 
for both of these systems. The committee supports both the 
procurement of effective interim solutions that provide 
capability as soon as possible and the potential acceleration 
of both the SALT and SANR programs.
    The committee recommends $12.9 million, the full amount 
requested, in PE 65380A in research, development, test, and 
evaluation, Army for the AMF Joint Tactical Radio System.

Army energy efficiency research and development programs

    The committee is aware that the Army has numerous research 
and development efforts in the area of reducing energy use 
across the Army. However, the committee seeks to better 
understand the totality of the Army's efforts. The committee 
directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a briefing to the 
House Committee on Armed Services no later than April 1, 2016 
on all Army Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) 
undertaken in the last 5 years on technologies that may improve 
the range and endurance of tactical vehicles without increasing 
fuel demand. The briefing should also include RDT&E efforts 
involving auxiliary power units, batteries, and other engine 
technologies for running `hotel' loads and surveillance systems 
during silent watch. Finally, the briefing should include 
information on any ongoing efforts or future plans for 
incorporating these technologies into programs of record or new 
acquisitions. For all systems described, the briefing should 
identify funding amounts and requirements.

Army Warfighting Assessment and network experimentation activities

    The budget request contained $99.2 million in PE 64798A for 
Brigade Analysis, Integration and Evaluation.
    The committee supports the Army's Force 2025 initiative to 
make the Army a more expeditionary force while improving 
tactical mobility, lethality, protection, and sustainability. 
In addition, the committee supports the Network Integration 
Evaluation (NIE) and Army Warfighting Assessment (AWA), which 
are required to ensure the Army can attain Force 2025 goals. 
The committee believes that the NIE and AWA must continue to be 
an integral part of the Army's modernization to ensure future 
policies and procurements can successfully be integrated into 
the Army's operations. The Army should ensure that NIE and AWA 
remain a part of the Army's acquisition, and research, 
development, testing, and evaluation processes into the future.
    The committee recommends $99.2 million, the full amount 
requested, in PE 64798A for Brigade Analysis, Integration and 
Evaluation.

Ballistic resistant adaptive seating system

    The committee understands current helicopter seating 
systems (HSS) were designed for primarily limited duration 
missions and focused solely on mitigating injuries from hard 
landings. The current seating system design did not consider 
other areas of concern that could impact the warfighter, such 
as increases in flight duration, the long-term effects of poor 
ergonomics, whole body vibration, as well as changes in pilot 
demographics, to include omitting female pilot anthropomorphic 
data. The committee understands the Department of Defense and 
the Army are studying current HSS designs and have identified a 
need to improve current systems. The committee is aware the 
Joint Aircraft Survivability Program Office, the U.S. Army 
Aviation Development Directorate--Aviation Applied Technology 
Directorate, and industry are now focusing on identifying, 
developing, and optimizing new technologies in order to 
mitigate or eliminate deficiencies in current HSS performance. 
The committee believes the Department should develop ways to 
accelerate this technology, which could provide increases in 
force protection, survivability, as well as eliminate long-term 
disability that is common in rotary wing aviators. The 
committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a 
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later 
than January 15, 2016, on any plans for the potential 
improvement of the HSS.

Composite barrel technology development

    The committee has long championed weight reduction 
initiatives for individual soldier equipment to include small 
arms and mortars. The committee believes that advances in 
material technology for small arms and mortar components could 
significantly improve overall performance of these weapon 
systems. The committee is aware that hybridized advanced 
composite barrel systems should be designed to incorporate 
high-performance materials such as a polyimide matrix composite 
comprising a resin matrix, thermally conductive additives, 
thermal management coatings, and continuous high-strength and 
high modulus structural fibers. The committees encourages the 
Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and 
Technology to analyze, design, manufacture, test, and invest in 
medium caliber barrels and muzzle brakes that utilize advanced 
composite technologies that would increase stiffness, optimize 
mass/center of gravity, and increase the life span of the 
system. The committee understands this capability could also 
provide for increases in accuracy, performance, and lethality 
of medium caliber weapon systems such as the M240 medium 
machine gun. Additionally, the committee encourages the 
continued development of advanced high-temperature resistant 
composite technologies for lightweight mortar tubes and 
recoilless rifles. The committee believes that with additional 
investment these advanced technologies could provide light 
infantry units with mortar systems, such as the 81mm mortar 
system, with weight reduction, thermal performance, and 
longevity that will enable the military services to affordably 
maintain overmatch capability on the battlefield as well as 
provide growth capacity for these advanced weapon systems.

Detection and threat identification technologies

    The committee is aware that the Defense Threat Reduction 
Agency continues to have a strong partnership with each of the 
military services, as well as with U.S. Special Operations 
Command, which has contributed to the development and fielding 
of technologies that reduce, counter, and eliminate the threat 
of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and high-yield 
explosive materials. The committee remains concerned about 
credible threats posed by state and non-state actors in their 
attempts to acquire and weaponize chemical and biological 
materials for use against the United States and its allies. 
Therefore, the committee encourages the Defense Threat 
Reduction Agency to continue the genomic research and 
development of innovative and emerging detection, threat 
identification technologies and medical countermeasures to 
ensure prompt transition of validated capabilities to address 
the emerging infectious disease threats. The committee 
emphasizes the importance of advancing genomic research as a 
method to stay ahead of the changing emerging threats from 
highly infectious viruses.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the 
Defense Threat Reduction Agency to provide a briefing to the 
House Committee on Armed Services by December 31, 2015, on its 
efforts to prioritize the prompt transfer of funding to the 
U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease to 
advance research as it relates to genomics and highly 
infectious threats, to include the potential for lightweight, 
handheld devices for diagnostics, detection, and analysis.

Fuel system survivability technology and standards

    In the committee report (H. Rept. 112-479) accompanying the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the 
committee directed the Director of the U.S. Army Tank 
Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center 
(TARDEC) to provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees that detailed the status of the Army's evaluation of 
occupant centric survivability systems for combat and tactical 
vehicles. In the committee report (H. Rept. 113-102) 
accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2014, the committee directed the Director of TARDEC to 
brief the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House 
Committee on Armed Services on the advisability and feasibility 
of establishing objective and threshold survivability 
operational requirements for thermal injury prevention in 
ground combat and tactical vehicles. The Joint Explanatory 
Statement (Committee Print No. 4) accompanying the Carl Levin 
and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2015 directed the Secretary of the Army to 
submit a report to the congressional defense committees that 
addresses thermal injury prevention needs to improve occupant 
centric survivability systems for combat and tactical vehicles 
against overmatching ballistic threats.
    Based on information gathered from these required reports 
and briefings, the committee encourages the Secretary of the 
Army to develop operationally realistic survivable fuel system 
specifications, as well as develop standards for ground combat 
and tactical vehicles that would address fuel containment 
technology requirements consistent with vehicle survivability 
requirements.

Geo-Enabled Mission Command Enterprise

    The committee is aware that the Geo-Enabled Mission Command 
Enterprise works to provide access to analytic tools for users 
in bandwidth-constrained environments, increasing the 
situational awareness of the operational environment in support 
of mission planning and operations. However, the committee also 
notes that there are currently concerns about the 
standardization of how geospatial information is displayed, 
creating the potential for confusion during mission planning 
and combat operations. The Army is seeking to improve the 
display of digital geospatial information in a common manner 
across various hardware platforms that are developed by 
different organizations in the Army and the committee is also 
aware that the Marine Corps is struggling with similar 
requirements to rapidly share all-source geospatial information 
across the Marine Corps in similar conditions. The committee 
encourages exploring potential further investment in 
competitively procured commercial geospatial products to 
provide a common operating picture and ensure the efficient 
exchange of information during critical operations across all 
echelons. The committee encourages the Army and the Marine 
Corps to work together to the extent practicable in order to 
jointly invest in technological solutions to satisfy those like 
requirements.

High-resolution 3-D topographic terrain data supporting tactical 
        operations

    The committee is concerned about the continuing lack of 
timely, high-resolution topographic terrain data and high 
resolution 3D imagery needed by combatant commanders and 
tactical operators to plan, train for, and conduct operations 
over complex, urban terrain, as well as in dense foliage. The 
committee is aware that the Department of Defense currently 
relies upon certain space-based capabilities to provide such 
data, but that there are limitations in the capacity of those 
assets, as well as technical limitations that significantly 
hamper collection in certain environments. The committee 
believes that in some permissive environments, manned or 
unmanned airborne collection could provide the necessary 
detail, capacity, timeliness and coverage needed to support 
tactical and operational planning. This has been demonstrated 
by operational experience in the Government of the Islamic 
Republic of Afghanistan, as well as the Republic of Iraq, and 
is reinforced by the continuing requests for capability from 
joint urgent operational needs statements.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army 
to conduct an analysis of the high-resolution 3-D topographic 
terrain data requirements to support tactical operations, and 
brief the House Committee on Armed Services by November 1, 2015 
on the results. This assessment should determine the current 
requirements from the combatant commands, as well as a 
projection for the required needs across the future year's 
defense plan, and compare that to the ability of the current 
systems to meet those needs. In instances where the projected 
requirements are not being satisfied by the current 
capabilities, the Secretary should make recommendations about 
how to address such shortfalls.

Human performance research

    The committee is aware that ongoing research on human 
performance, augmentation and cognitive enhancement is an 
important component of a soldier-centric Army strategy for the 
future warfighting force. During a time when the Army is being 
asked to do more with less, the committee supports initiatives 
that aim to improve warfighter's cognitive, physiological, 
physical, and nutritional performance. These human performance 
dimensions will ensure military overmatch against current 
adversaries and emerging threats and align with Army goals and 
future requirements for human-soldier performance and 
enhancement.
    Improvement of human performance also supports the U.S. 
Army Capstone Concept's central idea of operational 
adaptability by providing a framework to maximize individual 
and team performance through the identification, development, 
and optimal integration of human capabilities. To this end, the 
committee is aware of Army efforts to design and build a 
research facility called the Soldier Squad Performance Research 
Institute to enhance soldier performance. The committee 
encourages the Army to consider locating that facility in a 
region containing the best research, development, test, and 
evaluation support system, including industrial, academic, and 
Federal facilities to support its mission with the necessary 
specialized talent in medical research, life science, human 
performance science, physical, nutritional, and psychological 
research.

Improved Turbine Engine Program

    The budget request contained $51.2 million in PE 67139A for 
the Improved Turbine Engine Program (ITEP).
    The committee continues to support the Army research and 
development budget request for ITEP, as well as the acquisition 
strategy included in the request. ITEP is a competitive 
acquisition program that is designed to develop a more fuel 
efficient and powerful engine for the current Black Hawk and 
Apache helicopter fleets. This new engine will increase 
operational capabilities in high/hot environments, while 
reducing operating and support costs. The committee 
acknowledges the benefits of improved fuel efficiencies through 
lower specific fuel consumption that the ITEP will bring to the 
battlefield. In addition, the committee encourages the Army to 
prioritize maintenance and sustainment cost savings for ITEP to 
ensure the continued affordability of the program.
    The committee recommends $51.2 million, the full amount 
requested, in PE 67139A for the ITEP program.

Indirect Fire Protection Capability

    The committee notes that the Army is planning on 
integrating only a single missile as part of the Indirect Fire 
Protection Capability (IFPC) Increment 2 Block 1 program. The 
committee is concerned by the lack of funding to assess the 
suitability of other interceptors known to have significant 
capability to address rocket, artillery, and mortar threats, as 
well as other threat classes, to demonstrate the Multi-Mission 
Launcher can perform multiple missions.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army 
to provide to the House Committee on Armed Services by January 
15, 2016, the Alternate Interceptor Trade Study that was 
directed by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 
Logistics, and Technology in 2014. In addition, the committee 
directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a briefing to the 
House Committee on Armed Services by January 15, 2016, that 
details the Army's plan and an estimate of required funding to 
potentially demonstrate and integrate alternate interceptors on 
the Multi-Mission Launcher before milestone B of the IFPC 
Increment 2 Block 1 program.

Joint Improvised Explosive Device Analysis Tool

    The committee is concerned that the Army decided not to 
field Joint Improvised Explosive Device Analysis Tool (JIST) 
software after spending more than $10.0 million developing it 
in conjunction with the Joint Improvised Explosive Device 
Defeat Organization (JIEDDO). While the committee understands 
that the Army intends to use an existing software program 
currently resident in the Distributed Common Ground Station-
Army (DCGS-A) program to partially meet the requirement for 
improvised explosive devices (IED) forensic analysis, the 
committee believes that the critical nature of the enduring IED 
threat likely demands a dedicated software analysis tool to 
fully meet intelligence analysis requirements. Elsewhere in 
this Act, the committee recommends a provision that would 
require the Army to detail its plans for competition of 
selected DCGS-A components as part of the DCGS-A Increment 2 
program. The committee expects the Army to include IED forensic 
analysis tools as part of any DCGS-A Increment 2 competition 
plans. In addition, the committee directs the Inspector General 
of the Department of Defense to deliver a report, not later 
than March 1, 2016, to the House Committee on Armed Services 
regarding JIEDDO's and the Army's processes and decisions that 
led to the development of JIST software and the subsequent 
decision not to field it.

Land-Based Anti-Ship Missile Program

    The committee notes that the October 2014 Army Operating 
Concept, ``Win in a Complex World,'' emphasizes the role for 
Army forces to project land based power into other domains and 
that, ``Future Army forces will support joint force freedom of 
movement and action through the projection of power from land 
across the maritime, air, space, and cyberspace domains.'' The 
committee also notes in a technical report prepared for the 
U.S. Army entitled ``Employing Land Based Anti-Ship Missiles in 
the Western Pacific'' that the RAND corporation concluded that, 
``Land-based ASMs (Anti-Ship Missiles) are readily available on 
the world's arms markets, are inexpensive, and would provide 
significant additional capabilities to the United States if 
integrated into the Army or the Marine Corps force structure.''
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees by 
March 1, 2016, as to the feasibility, utility, and options for 
mobile, land-based systems to provide anti-ship fires. Such 
fires should be addressed within the total portfolio of land 
based fires against air and surface based threats, including 
total cost considerations such as research and development, 
procurement, sustainment, and force structure considerations.

Lethal Miniature Aerial Munition System

    The committee notes the Army's goal of improving infantry 
squad capability through a variety of means, including 
precision weapons with increased ranges compared to current 
systems. The committee is aware of the effectiveness of the 
Lethal Miniature Aerial Munition System (LMAMS) currently 
fielded in the United States Central Command theater of 
operations and supports the potential distribution of this 
capability across Army infantry units. Therefore, the committee 
directs the Secretary of the Army to submit a report to the 
House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2016 
on potential transition of the LMAMS to a program of record. 
The report should include information on the performance of the 
system to date, the cost of expanding its issue to more units, 
and operational suitability and effectiveness issues with the 
system.

Lithium ion super-capacitors

    The committee is aware of the investments the Army has made 
in lithium ion super-capacitor research, development, and 
demonstration. The committee encourages further investment in 
this important area, as super-capacitors are critical to 
current and future platforms. Recent advances in lithium ion 
super-capacitor technology may also mitigate or eliminate 
safety concerns that have slowed operational deployment of 
current and future platforms.

Material development, characterization, and computational modeling

    The committee recognizes the importance of evaluation of 
materials and technologies, designs, and the development of 
methodologies and models to enable enhanced lethality and 
survivability. Methods such as computational research allow for 
the development of models that predict the mechanical 
properties of materials that are used in research and 
development at the U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL). These 
models and simulations provide a cost savings to the Department 
of Defense by simulating materials prior to testing them to 
ensure mechanical properties will work together. Additionally, 
these methodologies allow for the enhanced development of 
technologies such as lightweight armors, protective structures, 
kinetic energy active protection, ballistic shock and mine 
blast protection, helmet technologies to prevent traumatic 
brain injury, as well as numerous other uses. The committee 
encourages ARL to continue the utilization of computational 
modeling and simulations research to achieve greater cost 
savings.

Medical evaluation of anthropomorphic data on vehicle blast testing

    The committee supports the Army's ongoing ground combat and 
tactical vehicle technology development and testing initiatives 
designed to mitigate the lethal effects from improvised 
explosive devices and the subsequent vehicle flight and 
rollover events. As the Army, along with industry, continues to 
evaluate emerging technologies, the committee recommends that 
medical research using anthropomorphic testing be included in 
ongoing Cooperative Research and Development Agreement test 
programs between the commercial sector and the Army on new 
sensors and active protection technologies. The committee 
believes that test reports should also consider including 
medical evaluation of anthropomorphic data germane to the 
analysis of new sensor technology and active protection 
response technology.

Mobile camouflage systems development

    The committee is concerned that currently fielded 
camouflage netting systems do not afford adequate passive 
concealment against current battlefield threats, particularly 
by short-wave infrared sensors. The committee understands the 
Department of the Army is currently reviewing a Capability 
Development Document for an improved Ultra-Lightweight 
Camouflage Net System. The committee commends these efforts and 
encourages the Department to accelerate research, development, 
procurement, and fielding of this advanced camouflage net 
system. The committee recommends continued development in 
several two-sided, reversible camouflage patterns, including 
Woodland, Desert, Urban, and Arctic/Snow, in order to replace 
outdated systems currently in the field.

Next-Generation signature management system

    The committee is aware that during Operation Enduring 
Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, several U.S. allied 
partner nations employed mobile camouflage systems on their 
combat and tactical vehicles. The committee notes the success 
of our allies in using these camouflage protective nets to 
provide effective signature management protection, as well as 
reducing heat and temperature inside and around combat and 
tactical vehicles. The committee is not aware of any current 
official program of record to field mobile camouflage systems 
for U.S. military combat and tactical vehicles. Therefore, the 
committee encourages the Department of Defense to consider 
evaluating mobile camouflage systems for U.S. military combat 
and tactical vehicles and, should the evaluation prove 
advisable and feasible, to begin resourcing such programs 
across the Future Years Defense Program.

Pacific Theater High Performance Computing capabilities

    The Committee is aware that the Department of Defense's 
High Performance Computing Modernization Program provides the 
Department with a strategic tool to accelerate technology 
development through the application of high performance 
computing (HPC), networking, and computational expertise. The 
purpose of this program is to provide the application of high-
end computing to increase productivity of the Department's 
research, development, test, and evaluation community. 
Moreover, the Committee recognizes that supercomputing 
resources provided by Department of Defense Supercomputing 
Resource Centers (DSRC) offer the Services and Combatant 
Commanders computing solutions that reduce cost, risk, and 
manpower requirements for in-theater demands.
    To this end, the Committee is aware that the Maui High 
Performance Computing Center (MHPCC) is the only DSRC that 
offers computing at the TS/SCI classification level, as well as 
the ability to provide enhanced access to supercomputing 
resources to Department of Defense customers by secure access 
to Department of Defense software and computing services 
through a web browser. Therefore, the Committee directs the 
Secretary of the Army, in coordination with the Commander, U.S. 
Pacific Command (PACOM), to brief the congressional defense 
committees by December 1, 2015, on the in-theater capabilities 
offered by the MHPCC, the customer base for the MHPCC, and the 
value of maintaining flexible, low-latency, high bandwidth 
classified network access to complement PACOM activities in-
theater.

Rotorcraft Degraded Visual Environment

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense 
Appropriations Act, 2015 (division C of Public Law 113-235) 
appropriated an increase of $20.0 million above the budget 
request for the development or procurement of a Degraded Visual 
Environment (DVE) system for rotorcraft programs. The committee 
is aware of the Army's challenge of operating rotary winged 
aircraft in austere environmental conditions, including brown-
out landings and marginal weather while operating in difficult 
terrain. The committee also believes that the Army's Medical 
Evacuation, Utility, and Cargo platforms face unique challenges 
operating in environments that levy significant risks to 
aircraft and crew members. However, the committee is concerned 
that the progress for pursuing these critical safety 
enhancements for rotorcraft programs is taking too long.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army 
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services 
by August 31, 2015, that includes an update on the Army's plans 
to test and evaluate DVE sensors and provide a potential 
funding profile and fielding plan of a DVE system.

Simplified Army radio network

    The committee notes that modernizing the tactical network 
remains a top priority for the Army, and that ease of use will 
be critical to the success of the deployed tactical network. 
The committee understands that feedback from deployed 
capability sets emphasizes the need to simplify tactical 
communications systems and make them easier for soldiers to 
operate with minimal training or intervention by industry or 
civilian field-support representatives. The committee supports 
the Army's drive to simplify the network and the goals of Force 
2025, including efforts already underway to improve waveform 
configuration, loading, and unit-task reorganization. However, 
the plan to achieve the goals that the Army has set with regard 
to improving the network remains unclear.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army 
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services 
by July 30, 2015, on the Army's current plan to enhance and 
simplify the network in order to meet the goals of the 
Simplified Tactical Army Reliable Network, including key 
milestones and the resources needed.

Situational awareness prototype Constellation for Countering Weapons of 
        Mass Destruction

    The Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction (CWMD) 
situational awareness prototype Constellation is described as a 
next-generation information gathering, sharing, analysis, 
collaboration, and visualization system to improve situational 
awareness across the CWMD enterprise. The committee is 
supportive of efforts to improve coordination and situational 
awareness and recognizes the contribution of Constellation to a 
synchronized, informed whole-of-government response to the 
Ebola crisis. The committee is also aware of other efforts that 
have a similar function in tracking and analyzing CWMD threats 
and believes the Department of Defense should avoid duplication 
of efforts in this area. The committee further believes that a 
common platform must be successfully integrated with the other 
relevant Department of Defense and U.S. Government partners. 
The committee urges the Defense Threat Reduction Agency to 
continue to engage the interagency to ensure efforts are fully 
coordinated and not duplicative.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to brief the House Committee on Armed Services by July 30, 
2015, on the status of the Constellation prototype and the 
activities for ensuring that it avoids duplication with other 
CWMD systems.

Soldier Enhancement Program

    The budget request contained $10.5 million across multiple 
appropriations for the Army's Soldier Enhancement Program (SEP) 
initiatives.
    The SEP was established to evaluate government-off-the-
shelf, commercial-off-the-shelf, or non-developmental items to 
improve weapons and individual equipment for soldiers. The 
committee notes the SEP does not fund lengthy developmental 
programs or procure large numbers of major items for fielding, 
and recognizes the program's design enables evaluation of 
systems that have the potential to meet an urgent operational 
need or quickly close a capability gap.
    The committee believes additional SEP funding could provide 
a substantial benefit to the industrial base and to the 
individual soldier. The committee recognizes that the Army 
relies heavily on the industrial base for innovation and new 
product development, and a more optimal funding profile for the 
SEP could facilitate greater small-scale procurement, more in-
depth field evaluation opportunities, as well as the means to 
rapidly field validated technologies to the soldier in a more 
streamlined and timely manner. In order to remain responsive 
and execute the intent of SEP, the committee understands the 
optimal average SEP funding level is estimated by the Army to 
be at approximately $12.0 million to $14.0 million annually. 
The committee notes that sub-optimal funding levels would 
result in an inability to evaluate initiatives for lighter, 
more lethal weapons, munitions, and individual equipment for 
soldiers.
    The committee recommends $15.5 million, an increase of $5.0 
million in PE 64601A, for Army SEP initiatives.

Soldier Protection System and weight reduction technology

    The Army's Soldier Protection System (SPS) provides a 
lighter weight modular, scalable integrated system of mission 
tailorable personnel protection equipment (PPE), while also 
improving the level of mobility, form, fit, and function for 
both male and female soldiers. The committee is aware the SPS 
includes subsystems such as protection for the head, eyes, 
extremities, torso, and other integrated sensor packages. The 
committee notes a low-rate initial production decision is 
expected in fiscal year 2015. The committee understands that 
the Army plans on fielding two to three brigade combat team 
sets per year and has programmed approximately $575.0 million 
for SPS across the Future Years Defense Program. While the 
committee commends the Army on their SPS effort, the committee 
encourages the Army to provide enough funding to maintain two 
vendors for competitive purposes, and also encourages the 
accelerated fielding of SPS to all soldiers as a way to sustain 
current systems through modernization.
    The committee understands that body armor system weights 
have remained relatively constant over the last decade in spite 
of advances in materials technologies because protection levels 
have also increased in response to threats. The committee 
believes current body armor systems provide outstanding 
protection to the warfighter, but their weight contributes to 
the overburden issue and decline in performance. The committee 
commends the Army for addressing this challenge by shifting 
from a more discrete component level development strategy to a 
more systems engineering and system level approach to body 
armor and PPE development as a means to improve soldier 
capabilities. The committee has long championed the importance 
of reducing the weight of current body armor and personal 
protective equipment systems, as well as stressing the critical 
need for investment in weight reduction initiatives, along with 
technology insertions to improve performance and survivability. 
The committee believes the Department of Defense must maintain 
significant investment in near-term solutions that can 
effectively reduce the weight of body armor, while also 
investing in the development of revolutionary new material 
technologies that could provide for significant breakthroughs 
in weight and performance.

Technology for countering enemy unmanned aerial systems

    The committee recognizes that enemy unmanned aerial systems 
represent a growing threat to U.S. and coalition forces. As 
unmanned aerial systems become more affordable and available, 
this technology has become increasingly available to non-state 
actors. The committee is aware of efforts by the Army 
Electronic Warfare division to develop technology that can 
recognize the uplinks between unmanned aerial vehicles and 
controllers on the ground to disrupt system communication to 
disable such threats and encourages the Army to continue its 
research into severing these control signals.

Ultra-light combat tactical vehicle test and evaluation

    The committee understands the Army is proceeding forward to 
address the infantry brigade tactical mobility gap in 
accordance with a three-phased plan outlined in the operational 
need statement (ONS) submitted by the 82nd Airborne Division 
and endorsed by 18th Airborne Corps and the U.S. Army Forces 
Command. The committee notes the ONS outlined immediate, 
interim, and long-term solutions to address this urgent 
capability gap for light infantry units.
    The committee understands the immediate solution allows the 
82nd Airborne Division to retain a tactical mobility set of 
high mobility, multi-purpose wheeled vehicles. The interim 
solution is the procurement of a commercial off-the-shelf 
(COTS) set of vehicles, and the long-term solution is the 
development of a programmatic solution through the traditional 
Army acquisition process. The committee is aware that the Army 
has addressed the immediate solution and has now authorized the 
interim COTS solution with the procurement of 33 ultra-light 
tactical vehicles in order to allow the execution of a proof-
of-principle concept. The committee understands that additional 
vehicle procurement is contingent on the results from testing 
conducted by the 82nd Airborne Division.
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide 
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 
2016, on the test results for the proof-of-principle for the 
interim solution. Should the test results prove favorable, the 
committee expects the briefing to provide details of the 
funding profile and acquisition strategy for the rapid 
acquisition and fielding of this interim solution, as well as 
the acquisition strategy for the proposed long-term solution.

Vehicle occupant protection technology development

    The committee is aware of the development of technology to 
detect and autonomously respond in real time to vehicle 
underbody explosive incidents with an active response to 
counter vehicle flight, and reduce the physical effects on 
vehicle occupants through a Cooperative Research and 
Development Agreement between industry and the Army. The 
committee directs the Secretary of the Army to brief the House 
Committee on Armed Services within 45 days after the date on 
which the budget for fiscal year 2017 is submitted to Congress 
pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, on 
the results of the testing on this technology to date, as well 
as provide an assessment of the potential and prospective 
timing for this technology to be incorporated into vehicle 
occupant protection technology vehicle procurement programs.

           Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy


                                Overview

    The budget request contained $17.88 billion for research, 
development, test, and evaluation, Navy. The committee 
recommends $16.65 billion, a decrease of $1.23 billion to the 
budget request.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
research, development, test, and evaluation, Navy are 
identified in division D of this Act.

                       Items of Special Interest


Advanced Low Cost Munitions Ordnance

    The committee notes the Navy's efforts to develop an 
Advanced Low Cost Munitions Ordnance (ALaMO) for the Littoral 
Combat Ship (LCS) by Fiscal Year 2020. The committee believes 
the LCS program should be equipped with the most affordable, 
lethal, defensive, and offensive capabilities across all 
mission areas. The committee supports the Navy's efforts to 
develop ALaMO, specifically a guided 57mm projectile to counter 
threats against small boat swarms and others. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Assistant Secretary of the Navy 
(Research, Development and Acquisition) to brief the House 
Committee on Armed Services by August 30, 2015 on the current 
status of the ALaMO program. The briefing should include, but 
not be limited to, an evaluation of the current funding profile 
and schedule for this program across the Future Years Defense 
Program, as well as discuss potential courses of action to 
accelerate or streamline the current program strategy.

Anti-Submarine Warfare Continuous Trail Unmanned Vessel

    The committee is aware that the fiscal year 2016 budget 
request contains funding within research, development, testing, 
and evaluation, Defense-Wide, for the Defense Advanced Research 
Projects Agency (DARPA) to continue work on the Anti-Submarine 
Warfare Continuous Trail Unmanned Vessel.
    The committee is aware of and encouraged by recent at-sea 
tests demonstrating the success of the autonomous command and 
control software aboard a surrogate test vessel. The committee 
notes that these tests successfully demonstrated a fully 
autonomous capability in a manner fully compliant with 
international collision regulations. Furthermore, the committee 
is supportive of the growing interest in additional at-sea 
testing among various Navy commands for other missions.
    The committee is further encouraged by the recently signed 
memorandum of agreement between DARPA and Office of Naval 
Research, and supports the funding being provided by both 
organizations for additional at-sea testing. The committee 
believes that additional testing should support flexibility of 
the autonomy design and application for additional future 
missions. The committee recommends continued collaboration 
between DARPA and the U.S. Navy to ensure the successful 
transition of this program.

Anti-surface warfare missile capability for Littoral Combat Ship

    The committee is aware of the complex close combat 
environments that Navy surface combatants encounter when 
operating in the littorals. Characteristic of this environment 
is the irregular threat posed by clusters of swarming small 
boats intermingled with non-combatant vessels. As a result, the 
anti-surface warfare mission for vessels, such as the Littoral 
Combat Ship (LCS) and Patrol Coastal (PC) ships, must possess 
positive-control missile capabilities that enable agile rules 
of engagement for applying decisive defensive countermeasures 
while minimizing the risks of collateral damage. Furthermore, 
it is critical that this balance of capabilities be fielded to 
the fleet as rapidly as possible.
    The committee is also aware of the Navy's efforts to field 
an anti-surface warfare missile capability for the LCS that 
meets these criteria; however, the committee is concerned that 
the current development path will require significant 
engineering/test and integration work that impacts the initial 
operating capability. Therefore, the committee directs the 
Secretary of the Navy to provide a briefing to the House 
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2016, 
detailing the cost and schedule of current development efforts 
on anti-surface warfare missile capability for the LCS and PC 
ships. The briefing should evaluate comparative systems' speed 
of integration to the fleet, range, weight, In-Flight Target 
Update capability, and ability to leverage existing fielded 
systems.

Automated Test and Retest

    The committee recognizes the value that the Small Business 
Innovative Research (SBIR) program provides to the Department 
of Defense in gaining access to new and innovative technologies 
that, when successful, can be integrated into new acquisition 
programs of record. As noted by the National Research Council 
in its most recent assessment of the Department of Defense SBIR 
program in 2014, these projects are highly successful at 
commercialization. Data from that study indicates that about 70 
percent of Department of Defense Phase II projects reach the 
market. In addition, these projects ``are in broad alignment 
with the agency's mission needs,'' and result in broader 
impacts on the innovation ecosystem, such as strong linkages 
with universities, support for graduate students, and licensing 
of technology from universities.
    The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense 
is not fully utilizing the scope of the unique authorities 
embedded in the SBIR legislation. In addition to potentially 
shortening acquisition cycle time, SBIR can be useful in 
leveraging the innovation of the small business community and 
growing new technology areas. A good example of the benefits of 
the SBIR program is the Navy's Automated Test and Retest (ATRT) 
Initiative, which has demonstrated impressive results in 
reducing the time, reducing the cost, and improving the quality 
of fielding new capabilities by performing research, 
development, and application of automated testing technologies 
for the test and evaluation of Naval warfare systems. The 
committee believes that the valuable lessons from such 
activities as ATRT should be more widely leveraged across the 
Navy and the rest of the Department of Defense. The committee 
believes it is especially important to make sure that program 
managers and contracting officers are fully cognizant of the 
unique authorities SBIR provides, and are duly encouraged to be 
as flexible and creative as possible in utilizing those 
authorities.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to brief the 
House Committee on Armed Services by November 1, 2015, on the 
Department's plans for improving the use of SBIR authorities. 
This briefing should address how to better educate program 
managers and contracting officers on the special authorities of 
SBIR, any recommendations for how to improve or strengthen 
those authorities, metrics for assessing the use of SBIR 
authorities, and a process for integrating lessons learned from 
past successes like ATRT into future acquisition program 
planning and workforce development for the relevant 
communities.

Barking Sands Tactical Underwater Range

    The budget request contained $39.1 million in PE 24571N for 
consolidated training systems. Of this amount, no funds were 
requested for research and development to upgrade the anti-
submarine warfare (ASW) underwater range instrumentation needs 
at the Barking Sands Tactical Underwater Range at the Pacific 
Missile Range Facility in Hawaii.
    The committee recognizes that the military's ability to 
conduct advanced ASW training is a critical aspect of our 
military technological superiority. The Barking Sands Tactical 
Underwater Range, which was designed, manufactured, and 
installed in 1994, is the largest underwater instrumented range 
in the world, and covers over 1,100 square nautical miles. 
However, the committee is very concerned that the current 
system is beyond its 20 year design life, and rapidly becoming 
difficult to operate, repair, and maintain. Senior leaders 
within the Nation's submarine community have been on record 
since 2012 calling for a range replacement to begin in order to 
maintain worldwide ASW fleet readiness and superiority. To 
support such efforts, the committee directs the Secretary of 
the Navy to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed 
Services by March 1, 2016, on the Secretary's plan to meet this 
longstanding fleet requirement. The briefing should address the 
technology and instrumentation upgrade needs for the range with 
projected funding needs by fiscal year, a preliminary schedule 
of key milestones, and a fully competitive acquisition strategy 
to meet submarine fleet readiness requirements.
    Additionally, the committee recommends $54.1 million, an 
increase of $15.0 million, in PE 24571N to support upgrading 
the ASW underwater range instrumentation needs at the Barking 
Sands Tactical Underwater Range.

Continuation of Brimstone missile assessment

    The Brimstone missile is an air-launched ground attack 
missile in use by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and 
Northern Ireland's Royal Air Force. The committee notes that 
the Brimstone missile has a dual-mode seeker which is capable 
of both active radar homing and laser guidance which allows for 
precision attack against moving targets, and has been used in 
combat operations in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, 
Libya, and in current operations in the Republic of Iraq.
    The committee understands that defending against swarms of 
small enemy boats, known as fast inshore attack craft, from 
strike fighter aircraft, maritime patrol aircraft, and 
helicopters is a challenging mission for the Department of the 
Navy, and the committee believes that the Brimstone missile may 
be a solution to address this threat. Additionally, the 
committee believes that the Brimstone missile could be used for 
close air support missions.
    The committee supports the use of funds authorized and 
appropriated for fiscal years 2014 and 2015 which are being 
used to provide the analysis needed to determine if the 
Brimstone missile is suitable for the F/A-18 aircraft carrier 
environment. If found suitable, the committee urges the 
Department of the Navy to use all available funding options, 
including the use of prior year funds, to expedite integration 
and fielding of the Brimstone missile on F/A-18E and F Super 
Hornet aircraft. The committee also notes that on April 20, 
2015, the Navy initiated a request for information (RFI) as a 
market survey tool to solicit industry input to support 
possible future acquisition planning for a direct-attack, fire-
and-forget weapon for F/A-18E/F Super Hornet aircraft. The 
committee understands the RFI indicates a planned initial 
operational capability in 2023, with a possible planned funding 
start for the multi-mode missile in fiscal year 2017. The 
committee encourages full and open consideration of all 
suitable solutions to meet this proposed planned schedule as 
part of the RFI.

F414 engine noise reduction research and development

    The committee supports Department of Defense efforts to 
reduce noise-related injuries and conditions that impact 
significant numbers of active-duty and former members of the 
military. Specifically, the committee supports ongoing Navy 
research and development efforts related to the F414 engine, 
which is used in the F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler 
aircraft. The committee notes, however, that testing conducted 
by the Navy in October 2014 using chevron engine nozzle 
attachments did not achieve the hoped for noise reduction 
results. The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to 
provide a briefing not later than September 30, 2015 to the 
House Committee on Armed Services on the status of F414 engine 
noise reduction research and development activities. The 
briefing should include details on recent F414 engine noise 
reduction efforts and other Navy noise reduction research and 
development activities and programs.

Five-inch precision guided projectile development for naval surface 
        fire support

    The budget request included $0.9 million in PE 63795N for 
Land Attack Technology, but contained no funding for 5-inch 
guided projectile development and demonstration.
    The committee understands the Navy has recognized that 
current surface Navy gunnery requirements are outdated and that 
new technologies such as railgun and directed energy weapons 
are nearing readiness for technology transition. The committee 
commends the Navy for initiating a review of naval surface 
fires requirements and for establishing the Advanced Naval 
Surface Fires (ANSF) initiative. The committee understands the 
ANSF initiative would conduct a capabilities assessment and 
review of all surface Navy requirements related to self-
defense, anti-surface warfare, naval surface fires support, 
strike warfare, counterintelligence, surveillance and 
reconnaissance, and integrated air and missile defense.
    The committee is particularly interested in the ANSF 
efforts related to naval surface fires support. The committee 
notes the ANSF is assessing options for providing a near-term 
5-inch guided munition capability. The 5-inch guided munition 
would be used for improved and extended range naval surface 
fire support. The committee is aware the Navy has issued a 
request for information to industry regarding this capability 
and has received several responses that could create the 
environment for a full and open competition. The committee 
believes this technology could significantly improve naval 
surface fires support capability and could potentially be 
quickly introduced into the fleet given potential mature 
technology readiness levels.
    The committee recommends $10.9 million, an increase of 
$10.0 million, in PE 63795N to accelerate the development and 
demonstration of 5-inch guided projectile technology for naval 
surface fires support.

Fully homomorphic encryption

    The committee is aware of the work done by the Defense 
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in the Programming 
Computation on Encrypted Data (PROCEED) program to develop 
methods that allow computing with encrypted data without first 
decrypting it. One such method, fully homomorphic encryption, 
could theoretically allow for that, but is limited by 
impractically slow computational speeds. The DARPA PROCEED 
program, as well as other work being done by the Navy through 
the Office of Naval Research and the Space and Naval Warfare 
Command, is pursuing methods to make such cyber security 
methods more practical and implementable. As a result of these 
efforts, new approaches for secure cloud computing and 
cybersecurity are maturing and moving into practical use. The 
committee recognizes that these design, development, and 
implementation activities are costly, yet necessary for forward 
progress. The committee is also aware that the Navy and Marine 
Corps have identified the need to develop and apply fully 
homomorphic encryption, particularly for protecting safety-
critical cyber systems and reducing leakage of information to 
our adversaries. Such goals are critical not only to properly 
securing our nation's computers, but also to protecting 
sensitive data. Therefore, the committee encourages the Navy 
and Marine Corps to continue research into fully homomorphic 
encryption and to examine additional areas related to 
implementation, integration, and software tooling support.

National Sea Based Deterrence Fund

    The committee notes that the National Sea Based Deterrence 
Fund (NDSF) was created by the Carl Levin and Howard P. 
``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) to address a congressional 
determination that the recapitalization of the Ohio-class 
ballistic missile submarine was a national strategic 
imperative. The committee also notes that the recapitalization 
of this strategic asset is currently estimated at $95.77 
billion. The committee believes that this acquisition program 
will have an extraordinary and detrimental impact to 
investments in the shipbuilding and construction, Navy, account 
if traditional funding levels of this account are sustained. 
The committee also believes that the entirety of the Department 
of Defense investment capabilities need to be used to 
recapitalize this strategic asset.
    Therefore, the committee recommends the transfer of $1.39 
billion for the Navy Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine 
replacement program from the research, development, test, and 
evaluation, Navy, account to the National Sea Based Deterrence 
Fund, Department of Defense account.

Navy communications experimentation

    The committee is aware that the Commander, Navy 7th Fleet 
is testing a broadband system that provides cellular-based, 
fourth generation long-term evolution (4G LTE) and broadband 
satellite communications to Navy ships. This Navy broadband 
effort could potentially improve the communications 
capabilities of naval platforms and promote information sharing 
and real-time collaboration in an emergency situation. Since 
this capability is built on commercial technologies, it could 
be rapidly fielded to improve the readiness, tactical 
communications, and morale, welfare, and recreation 
capabilities of the Navy. In light of the results from the 
recently completed Trident Warrior 15 Experimentation, the 
committee encourages the Navy to continue to examine the 
continued and expanded use of mobile broadband 4G LTE 
technology.

Requirements maturation and developmental planning

    The committee is aware that the Air Force maintains a 
program element line within its science and technology (S&T) 
budget for Requirements Analysis and Maturation. This activity 
is used to fund developmental planning and integrated 
simulation and analysis capabilities that are used to inform 
programs before they formally enter the acquisition process. 
Such activities might include: early systems engineering to 
comprehend capability needs, formulate and evaluate viable 
concepts, define trade space, assess technical risks, and 
identify technology needs. The committee recognizes that such 
work is very useful in providing a solid analytic basis for 
cost and capability trades that inform weapon systems 
requirements, acquisition milestones, decision points, and 
other phases. The committee believes that such support, which 
is at a small funding level at this stage, can provide huge 
benefits in risk reduction and cost avoidance for programs once 
they mature. The committee encourages the Navy to pursue 
similar developmental planning efforts, including dedicated S&T 
funding lines, to support such activities to inform programs of 
record.

Service life extension program for Auxiliary General Purpose 
        Oceanographic Research

    The budget request contained $42.2 million in PE 62435N for 
the Ocean Warfighting Environment Applied Research program.
    For academic research, the Navy operates and maintains 
Auxiliary General Purpose Oceanographic Research (AGOR) 
vessels. Three of these vessels require a mid-life overhaul, 
partial funding for which was provided in the Consolidated and 
Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (Public Law 113-
235). The committee notes that funding provided to date does 
not fully support all of the items that the Navy has determined 
are necessary to fully extend the life of these AGOR ships to 
40-45 years.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $62.2 million, an 
increase of $20.0 million, in PE 62435N for Ocean Warfighting 
Environment Applied Research, to procure the entirety of a mid-
life overhaul. The committee notes that the inclusion of this 
authorization of appropriations is predicated on the Navy's use 
of merit-based selection procedures in accordance with the 
requirements of section 2304(k) and 2374 of title 10, United 
States Code, or on competitive procedures, to conduct these 
overhauls.
    The committee continues to believe that oceanographic 
research is a core function of the Navy, and remains committed 
to ensuring the ability of the Navy to sustain its research 
priorities, even in the face of fiscally constrained budgets. 
The committee is concerned that the Navy has been decreasing 
funding in oceanographic research, especially sea-going 
research, and is concerned about the negative long-term 
implications these trends are likely to have on areas like 
anti-submarine warfare and battlespace awareness. Navy science 
and technology funding also plays a key role in information 
stewardship, including ocean mapping, oceanographic and 
meteorological data, that supports Navy, national, and 
international scientific goals.

Spectral Warrior

    The committee understands that U.S. Navy surface combatants 
are experiencing a significant increase in friendly and 
adversary satellite communications (SATCOM) interference events 
that could result in a degraded fleet mission capability. 
Ensuring the protection and connectivity of satellite 
communications for command and control, navigation, and ship 
protection should be an operational priority. The committee 
commends the Navy for fielding systems like Spectral Warrior 
that detect, characterize, and report all SATCOM interference 
events, although the committee is concerned that the quantity 
of systems being fielded may not meet the operational need. The 
committee encourages the Navy to develop requirements and fund 
a program of record that leverages currently fielded Spectral 
Warrior technologies to meet critical SATCOM assurance 
requirements.

Tactical Combat Training System program

    The budget request contained $39.1 million in PE 24571N for 
Consolidated Training System Development. Of this amount, $19.3 
million was requested for the Tactical Combat Training System 
(TCTS) program.
    The committee notes that the TCTS Increment II is a Navy 
program that will address important training range capability 
gaps. The committee also notes that as part of a separate, 
earlier Department of Defense program, the Department has 
developed the Common Range Integrated Instrumentation System 
(CRIIS) to provide a joint test and evaluation system. While 
the requirements for the systems are not identical, the 
committee understands that the CRIIS may require only minimal 
software and hardware changes to meet the requirements for the 
TCTS Increment II training system. As a result, the committee 
encourages the Department of the Navy to consider adapting the 
CRIIS program, if it has the potential to meet requirements and 
affordability targets, to provide the capability the Navy is 
seeking to field through the TCTS Increment II program.
    The committee recommends $39.1 million, the full amount 
requested, in PE 24571N for Consolidated Training System 
Development, including $19.3 million for the Tactical Combat 
Training System program.

Unmanned carrier aviation

    The committee notes that the Secretary of Defense has 
initiated an intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance 
(ISR) portfolio review to assess the merits of the entirety of 
Department of Defense assets that may be available to support 
combat operations. This review is being augmented by a U.S. 
Navy tactical aviation analysis to determine the 
characteristics and quantities of carrier based ISR unmanned 
aviation systems (UAS) necessary to optimize the overall 
carrier air wing. The committee also notes that section 217 of 
the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) 
included:
    (1) A limitation on funding associated with the Unmanned 
Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) air 
vehicle until the Secretary of Defense certifies that a review 
of requirements associated with the UCLASS air vehicle is 
complete and submits the results of such a review to the 
congressional defense committees; and
    (2) A requirement for the Secretary of the Navy to prepare 
a report to assess the overall carrier air wing composition to 
include UCLASS, the support offered by non-organic naval 
aviation forces such as MQ-4C Triton, and the intended 
capabilities offered by FA-XX, which is the replacement 
aircraft for the F/A-18 E/F aircraft.
    The committee believes that sea-based, long-range strike 
capabilities have incontrovertible merit and have been an 
integral element of U.S. carrier air wings in the past. Looking 
ahead, this capability may be the most important capability 
that the aircraft carrier can provide in contested environments 
and anti-access/area-denial scenarios. The committee believes 
that pursuit of a long-range penetrating strike capability 
should therefore be a critical focus of naval investments. The 
committee also believes that the capabilities offered by 
unmanned aviation may be the only capability that can support 
this mission requirement.
    The committee notes that the majority of naval aviation 
missions do not require the same high-end characteristics 
required for long-range penetrating strike missions. The 
committee recognizes that an unmanned aircraft with not all of 
the attributes of a high-end UAS may be a more economical and 
sustainable means of conducting persistent ISR, aerial 
refueling, and strike missions in low-to-medium threat 
environments. The committee also recognizes that the Navy has a 
validated capability gap in regard to ISR and encourages the 
Department of Defense to meet this requirement in an economical 
and efficient manner.
    Considering all of the options available to the Navy to 
augment the future carrier air wing, the committee believes 
that the continued development of the UCLASS program as a long-
range penetrating strike capability best meets the future 
carrier air wing requirements and will address a much needed 
capability deficiency in the current carrier strike design.
    Finally, the committee notes that the budget request 
included continued development of the UCLASS program, but does 
not include funds for the air vehicle. The committee encourages 
the Secretary of Defense to expeditiously complete the ISR 
portfolio analysis review and provide the proposed UCLASS 
Capabilities Development Document (CDD) to the congressional 
defense committees. If the CDD is not provided by August 31, 
2015, the committee directs the Secretary of the Defense to 
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by 
September 1, 2015, as to the terms of reference and an 
assessment that the Navy has the resources available and a 
strategy to deliver those required UCLASS capabilities. At a 
minimum, this brief should also include:
    (1) An updated cost estimate;
    (2) A schedule for holding a milestone B review and 
establishing an acquisition program baseline before initiating 
system development;
    (3) Plans for new preliminary design reviews or delta 
preliminary design reviews and technology maturation if more 
demanding requirements are validated; and
    (4) What consideration is being given to adopting an 
evolutionary acquisition approach.

         Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force


                                Overview

    The budget request contained $26.47 billion for research, 
development, test, and evaluation, Air Force. The committee 
recommends $25.95 billion, a decrease of $515.7 million to the 
budget request.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
research, development, test, and evaluation, Air Force program 
are identified in division D of this Act.

                       Items of Special Interest


Adaptive engine transition program

    The budget request contained $246.5 million in PE 64858F 
for the adaptive engine transition program (AETP).
    The committee supports the continued emphasis on research 
and development in the next generation of turbine engine 
technology. AETP is a competitive acquisition program that 
builds upon current research efforts and is designed to mature 
adaptive turbine engine technologies for next-generation 
propulsion systems. In addition to goals for significant fuel 
savings, the committee understands that AETP offers 
improvements in range and persistence, increased thrust, and 
improvements in thermal management capacity that cannot be 
achieved by improving existing engines. The committee believes 
that the program will leverage existing adaptive turbine engine 
science and technology demonstrations to develop an adaptive 
engine built around a broad suite of technologies. Many of 
these technologies share commonality with the latest 
commercially developed engines, which will enable multiple 
follow-on high confidence competitive acquisition programs. The 
committee notes that there are potential applications of this 
technology to both legacy and future combat aircraft. The 
committee encourages the Department of the Air Force to 
continue to make the necessary investments in these critical 
technologies to maintain technological superiority over any 
potential adversary.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $246.5 million, the 
full amount requested, in PE 64858F for the AETP program, and 
encourages the Air Force to explore acquisition strategies to 
accelerate the program.

Advanced manufacturing for low-cost sustainment

    The budget request contained $42.6 million in PE 63680F for 
the Air Force manufacturing technology program, but contained 
no funding to mature advanced additive manufacturing 
technologies to address the cost and sustainment challenges for 
aerospace applications.
    The committee is aware that the defense sustainment 
community has identified additive manufacturing as a means to 
dramatically lower the cost of maintaining aging weapon 
platforms. Additive manufacturing, more commonly known as 3D 
printing, allows the manufacture of a part with speed, 
flexibility, and little waste of materials. Currently, the Air 
Force uses additive manufacturing for design iteration, 
prototyping, tooling and fixtures, and for some noncritical 
parts. However, the committee recognizes that in the future the 
Air Force hopes to use additive manufacturing for building 
actual aerospace parts, such as fuel nozzles and heat 
exchangers. The committee believes that additional research 
needs to be done to validate the flight safety and integrity of 
such 3D printed parts to be able to reap the full benefits of 
this technology.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $52.6 million, an 
increase of $10.0 million, in PE 63680F to support the 
maturation of advanced manufacturing for low-cost sustainment 
that meets the performance requirements of aerospace 
applications.

Advanced pilot training family of systems

    The budget request contained $11.34 million in PE 65223F 
for the advanced pilot training (T-X) program.
    The committee supports the direction the Department of the 
Air Force is taking with the acquisition of a new trainer 
aircraft. Specifically, the committee supports the Department's 
approach to bundle the advanced pilot training system which 
would keep the aircraft, simulator, and courseware together, 
providing significant cost savings to the warfighter and 
taxpayer. Given the Department's planned retirement of the T-38 
in the late 2020s, the committee urges the Department of the 
Air Force to maintain a stable schedule, including potential 
initial operational capability in 2023.
    The committee recommends $11.34 million, the full amount 
requested, in PE 65223F for the advanced pilot training (T-X) 
program.

Air Force Minority Leaders Program

    The committee is aware that the Air Force maintains a 
program called the Air Force Minority Leaders Program, which 
partners a small disadvantaged business with students, 
teachers, and professors from historically black colleges and 
universities and minority institutions (HBCU/MI) to perform Air 
Force research tasks. The Air Force Minority Leaders Program is 
the largest Department of Defense research program that works 
with historically black colleges, and has been successful at 
promoting valuable research for the Department, as well as 
increasing the pipeline of minority scientific talent for 
future Air Force jobs and strengthening the scientific and 
educational infrastructure in the minority community.
    The committee encourages the Air Force to continue 
investing time, personnel, and resources in supporting research 
activities that can be conducted by the Air Force Minority 
Leaders Program to meet critical defense capabilities, science 
and technology, future workforce, and technical program 
objectives for the Air Force. Additionally, the committee urges 
the Air Force to find ways to expand the research areas in 
which the Air Force Minority Leaders Program can participate, 
as well as the ways in which to leverage the knowledge, skills, 
and expertise of those minority scientists and engineers 
engaged with that program.

Airborne sensor data correlation

    The budget request contained $68.3 million in PE 64759F for 
major test and evaluation investment, but contained no funding 
for development of airborne sensor data correlation.
    Airborne sensor data correlation is a research project to 
prototype fusing unmanned aerial system electro-optical and 
infrared full motion video to support accurate over-water 
weapons impact scoring. The committee understands that future 
testing for hypersonic and long-range weapons will require 
large test areas and larger hazard areas that could require 
dynamic re-planning and monitoring, and that current range 
instrumentation systems are limited to small target test areas, 
fixed sensors, and environmental restrictions. The committee 
believes that an airborne sensor data correlation project can 
support dynamic test measurement requirements over large target 
areas as range footprints are expanded to support the testing 
of longer range weapons.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $73.3 million, an 
increase of $5.0 million, in PE 64759F for airborne sensor data 
correlation.

B-52 radar modernization program

    The budget request contained $74.5 million in PE 11113F for 
B-52 squadrons, but contained no funding for the B-52 radar 
modernization program (RMP).
    In the committee report (H. Rept. 113-446) accompanying the 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015, the committee encouraged the Secretary of 
the Air Force to begin the B-52 RMP, then known as the B-52 
strategic radar replacement program, and is disappointed to 
note that the Secretary has opted not to include funds for this 
purpose for fiscal year 2016. Based on a Department of the Air 
Force report to the congressional defense committees in 2013, 
the committee continues to believe that a B-52 RMP is a lower 
cost option than sustaining the current radar over the 
projected service life of the B-52, especially in light of the 
prospect that sustainment costs for the B-52's legacy radar 
system are likely to significantly increase after 2017 based on 
obsolescence and diminishing manufacturing sources.
    Accordingly, the committee continues to encourage the 
Secretary of the Air Force to include funding in the fiscal 
year 2017 budget request that would begin replacement of the B-
52 legacy radar system, and expects that B-52 budget briefings 
for fiscal year 2017 to the congressional defense committees 
will address the Department of the Air Force plan to replace 
the B-52 radar.

Conformal phased array antennas

    The committee notes that there have been recent substantive 
improvements in antenna technology, providing enhanced 
capabilities to aircraft and unmanned aerial systems. 
Additionally, the committee is aware that these same platforms 
face environments where it would be useful for antennae to 
operate on different frequency bands and to be reconfigurable 
while in flight. The committee believes that these enhanced 
capabilities could be critically important in improving sensing 
in constrained or contested aerial environments. The committee 
encourages the Air Force to examine research opportunities to 
develop the fundamental theory, modeling, and demonstration of 
super-adaptable conformal phased array antennas.

Digital polarimetric radar development

    The committee notes that there have been major advances in 
the field of radar development with respect to incorporating 
both polarimetric and phased array radar technology in an all-
digital design. The committee considers the development of this 
technology as a critical enabler for the Air Force in the 
development of increased weather sensing, as well as discrete 
object tracking capabilities. The committee encourages the Air 
Force to examine research opportunities to create an all-
digital polarimetric phased radar for future use in discrete 
object sensing and tracking and concurrent use for weather 
observations.

Experimentation program

    The committee is aware that the Army, Navy, and the Office 
of the Secretary of Defense have all begun to implement funded 
program element lines to support increasing developmental and 
operational experimentation. The committee believes that such 
activities are extremely valuable to iron out technology 
challenges, identify areas of risk, refine operating concepts, 
and gain warfighter trust and confidence in untested systems. 
As noted elsewhere in this report, the committee is aware of 
numerous historical examples where experimentation with new 
technologies in peacetime paved the way for their adoption and 
effective use in wartime. The committee believes that 
increasing experimentation can be pivotal in laying the 
foundations for successful technology adoption by the 
warfighting community. Therefore, the committee encourages the 
Air Force to establish a similar program element funding line 
for experimentation to allow for greater flexibility to conduct 
such experimentation in the future and support transition of 
technology from the laboratory to the operational force.

F-16 active electronically scanned array radar upgrade

    The budget request contained $148.3 million in PE 27133F 
for F-16 squadrons, but contained no funding to conduct 
integration and testing for an F-16 active electronically 
scanned array (AESA) radar upgrade.
    The committee notes that, despite the termination of the 
combat avionics programmed extension suite (CAPES), the 
Department of the Air Force is considering a new effort to 
upgrade F-16 radars from the current APG-68 system to a modern 
AESA radar system. Further, the committee understands that this 
potential radar upgrade program is based upon a developing 
joint operational urgent need (JOUN) that specifically requires 
an AESA radar upgrade to the F-16 aircraft that perform the 
aerospace alert control mission. The committee supports taking 
all appropriate steps to meet this JUON as soon as possible.
    The committee expects the Department of the Air Force to 
minimize program concurrency between development, testing, and 
production for any such F-16 AESA radar upgrade. Specifically, 
the committee expects the Department to proceed in a manner 
that ensures proper integration and testing of radar upgrades 
so that the AESA upgrades meet requirements.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $198.3 million, an 
increase of $50.0 million, in PE 27133F to conduct integration 
and testing for an F-16 AESA radar upgrade, and encourages the 
Department of the Air Force to budget for development and 
procurement of this upgrade in the Future Years Defense 
Program.

F-35 dual-capable aircraft development program

    The Department of the Air Force budget request contained 
$518.0 million in PE 64800F for development of the F-35A, of 
which $5.0 million was for dual-capable aircraft development. 
As a dual-capable aircraft, the F-35 would be capable of 
performing both the conventional and nuclear weapons delivery 
missions.
    The committee notes that the F-35 dual-capable aircraft 
development program is part of the F-35 block 4 software 
program which will be completed subsequent to the conclusion of 
the system development and demonstration program, and will be 
released in increments known as blocks 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4 
with initial operational capability dates of each of those four 
blocks planned to occur between 2019 and 2025. The committee 
understands that the dual-capable F-35 aircraft would be 
included in block 4.3 or 4.4 to replace the aging F-16 aircraft 
which is currently performing the dual-capable aircraft 
mission.
    The committee recommends $5.0 million, the full amount 
requested, in PE 64800F for the F-35 dual-capable aircraft 
development program, and encourages the Department of the Air 
Force to accelerate the completion of the F-35 dual-capable 
aircraft development program in future budget requests.

Fifth generation tactical data link enterprise

    The committee notes that the data links for the Department 
of the Air Force's two fifth generation aircraft, the F-22 and 
the F-35, are proprietary, and are not interoperable, rendering 
these data links incapable of sharing data between these two 
types of aircraft. The committee understands that the 
Department of the Air Force intends to address this problem by 
using a separate data link, known as Link 16, which is 
currently in use by fourth generation aircraft. The committee 
further understands that Link 16 could be vulnerable in higher 
threat, anti-access and area denial environments.
    The committee believes that over the long term, the 
Department of the Air Force will need to upgrade the propriety 
data links to a non-proprietary next-generation waveform, or 
provide the industry associated with developing and producing 
data links the technical data packages for the current 
waveforms so that competition and innovation can be sustained. 
Accordingly, the committee encourages the Department of the Air 
Force to pursue competitive development and production of data 
links to provide for a future robust and innovative data link 
industrial base.

KC-135 auto throttles

    A KC-135 auto throttle system would allow a pilot to 
automatically set aircraft throttle settings to maximize fuel 
consumption for a given power setting to attain a specific 
indicated airspeed, instead of manually doing so. The committee 
understands that installation of a KC-135 auto throttle system 
would reduce cockpit workload, increase crew situational 
awareness, and result in a 3 percent fuel savings. The 
committee further understands that based on fuel savings, 
investment in such an auto throttle system could be recouped in 
as few as 4 years. The committee notes that other Air Mobility 
Command aircraft such as the KC-10, C-17, C-5, and KC-46 are 
also equipped with similar auto throttle capability.
    Therefore, the committee urges the Department of the Air 
Force to begin a program for the development and production of 
a KC-135 auto throttle system.

KC-46 aerial refueling tanker aircraft program

    The budget request contained $602.4 million in PE 65221F 
for KC-46 tanker development and $2.35 billion for procurement 
of 12 KC-46 tanker aircraft. The KC-46 tanker aircraft is being 
developed and procured to replace the aging Department of the 
Air Force KC-135 and KC-10 aerial refueling tanker fleets.
    The committee continues its long-standing support of the 
KC-46 tanker aircraft program, and believes that the KC-46 
tanker aircraft is necessary to meet current and future 
warfighter requirements for aerial refueling and airlift. 
However, the committee notes that Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) identified $200.0 million of funds authorized and 
appropriated for fiscal year 2015 for KC-46 development that 
have been determined excess to need because engineering change 
orders planned for fiscal year 2015 have not occurred, and 
these funds could be used to meet fiscal year 2016 
requirements. The committee further notes that the GAO has also 
identified $24.0 million of fiscal year 2015 KC-46 procurement 
funds that are excess to need for a similar reason, which could 
also be used to meet fiscal year 2016 requirements. Department 
of the Air Force KC-46 program officials have verified that the 
GAO's determination is correct.
    Consequently, the committee recommends $402.4 million, a 
decrease of $200.0 million, in PE 65221F for KC-46 tanker 
development, and $2.32 billion, a decrease of $24.0 million, 
for KC-46 procurement.

Long-range strike bomber

    The Department of Defense has indicated that it intends to 
pursue the acquisition of future long-range strike capabilities 
for operating in anti-access/area denial environments. 
According to the budget request for fiscal year 2016, the 
Secretary of Defense expects to significantly increase annual 
investments in long-range strike development over the next 5 
years, with investments from fiscal year 2016-20 projected to 
total nearly $14.00 billion. The acquisition of a new bomber is 
one of the key elements in the Department's planned long-range 
strike investments.
    Given the size of the planned investments and the strategic 
importance of successfully acquiring a new bomber, the 
committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States 
to conduct a review of the U.S. Air Force bomber acquisition 
program and to provide a briefing to all appropriately cleared 
Members and Professional Staff of the House Committee on Armed 
Services by March 1, 2016, on the findings of the review. 
Specifically, the Comptroller General shall include an 
examination of the bomber program's technology maturity in 
comparison with other Air Force acquisition programs at similar 
milestone events. This brief should also include an examination 
of the Air Force's: (1) overall acquisition strategy; (2) 
technology, design, and production readiness; (3) development, 
testing, and fielding progress; (4) cost and schedule 
implications; and (5) technical performance.
    The committee expects the Secretary of the Air Force shall 
ensure timely access to the necessary program information 
including, but not limited to, cost and budget information, 
detailed schedules, contractor data, program management 
reports, decision briefings, risk and technology readiness 
assessments, and technical performance measures.
    We encourage the Comptroller General to consider providing, 
when practical and feasible given security limitations, an 
annual unclassified summary of the program's status and risks.

Long-range strike bomber program

    The budget request contained $1.25 billion in PE 64015F for 
the long-range strike bomber (LRS-B) program. The LRS-B program 
is developing a new bomber aircraft that will be a long-range, 
air-refuelable, and highly survivable aircraft with significant 
nuclear and conventional stand-off and direct-attack weapons 
payload.
    The committee continues its long-standing support of the 
LRS-B program and believes that the LRS-B aircraft is required 
to address future threats. However, the committee notes that 
selection of a contractor to begin the LRS-B engineering and 
manufacturing development (EMD) program has been delayed 4 
months. The committee further notes that, according to program 
officials, this delay has resulted in an excess of $360.0 
million of funds authorized and appropriated for fiscal year 
2015 that could be used to meet requirements for fiscal year 
2016, and an excess of $100.0 million budgeted for fiscal year 
2016 that will not be used due to a slower spend rate in the 
EMD program during fiscal year 2016.
    Consequently, the committee recommends $786.2 million, a 
decrease of $460.0 million, in PE 64015F for the LRS-B program.

Next Generation Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System Electro-
        Optical, Infrared Sensor Capability

    The committee believes that the Air Force should consider, 
as part of the requirements for the Next Generation Joint 
Surveillance Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS), an integrated 
electro-optical/infrared (EO/IR) search capability. The 
committee notes that such a system could assist with precise 
identification of targets at extended ranges, which would 
provide tactical advantages to deployed forces. The committee 
further notes that EO/IR capability is already in very high 
demand and that adding this capability to Next Generation 
JSTARS may enable the platform to provide additional 
intelligence support capability. The committee directs the 
Secretary of the Air Force to provide a briefing to House 
Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 2016, on the potential 
utility of an integrated EO/IR capability on Next Generation 
JSTARS aircraft. The briefing should also include the potential 
cost and schedule impacts of adding such a capability to the 
Next Generation JSTARS development program.

Next Generation Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System 
        operational concepts

    The budget request contained $44.3 million in PE 37581F for 
the Next Generation (NextGen) Joint Surveillance Target Attack 
Radar System (JSTARS) program.
    The committee is aware that the Department of the Air Force 
has a requirement for a new manned command-and-control/
intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance aircraft given that 
the current, high-demand E-8C JSTARS aircraft are facing low 
availability rates, end-of-life issues, and growing sustainment 
costs. The committee encourages the Air Force to take into 
consideration a platform that is able to grow and adapt for 
unknown future threats and game-changing technologies.
    In addition, the committee would like to better understand 
the relationship between the system requirements and how the 
Department of the Air Force intends to employ JSTARS in the 
future. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
Air Force to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed 
Services by February 29, 2016, detailing the planned 
operational mission concepts for the NextGen JSTARS. This 
briefing should include, but not be limited to, how the 
aircraft and mission system will be employed in various phases 
of peacetime and combat operations. Additionally, the briefing 
should explain concepts for mission training, aircraft 
maintenance, force protection, aircraft security, crew manning, 
and future sustainability and modernization to include growth 
margin.
    The committee recommends $44.3 million, the full amount 
requested, in PE 37581F for the NextGen JSTARS program.

Technology transfer

    The budget request contained $3.5 million in PE 64317F to 
facilitate the transfer of technology from the Department of 
Defense to industry for both commercial and military use.
    The committee is aware that the technology transfer program 
was devolved from the Office of the Secretary of Defense to the 
Air Force in 2012 in an effort to achieve efficiencies and 
increase the effectiveness of the program. Technology transfer 
is a critical strategy for the Department that allows it to 
license or patent government laboratory developed technologies 
to leverage the manufacturing, production, and marketing 
economies of scale of the private sector.
    The committee believes that the Air Force should increase 
its investment in technology transfer efforts in order to 
improve the commercialization of intellectual property 
developed by the defense laboratories in support of critical 
cross-service technological needs such as human performance, 
cybersecurity, autonomous systems, unmanned vehicles, and rapid 
prototyping. The committee believes additional funding could 
expand the efforts to actively promote and broker cooperative 
research and development agreements (CRADAs) and partnership 
intermediary agreements (PIAs) between Department of Defense 
laboratories and industry, with a focus on non-traditional 
defense contractors.
    The committee recognizes that one challenge to supporting 
this technology transfer process is the administrative support 
needed for development of CRADAs and PIAs and the protection of 
intellectual property for both the government and industry. The 
committee notes that the Air Force is particularly challenged 
by the need to periodically engage experienced patent attorneys 
with expertise in specific technology areas. The committee 
believes that the Air Force should consider establishing one or 
more PIAs as a mechanism capable of making adjustments to 
surges in work, or handling new and emerging technology areas 
where there may be little or no expertise within the 
government.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $13.5 million, an 
increase of $10.0 million, in PE 64317F to support increased 
technology transfer activities within the Air Force, as well as 
the Department of Defense writ large.

Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar

    The budget request contained $14.9 million in PE 27455F for 
the Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar (3DELRR) 
program.
    While the committee is aware that the 3DELRR program has 
been delayed by more than a year due to a protest of the 
engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) contract award, 
the committee still believes this is a critical program that 
will provide a much-needed upgrade to current Department of the 
Air Force long-range radar systems. As a result, the committee 
urges the Department of the Air Force to keep the program on 
its new schedule that should require a significant increase in 
funding for the EMD phase in fiscal year 2017.
    The committee recommends $14.9 million, the full amount 
requested, in PE 27455F for the 3DELRR program.

Wide area surveillance

    The budget request contained $50.2 million in PE 35206F for 
development of airborne reconnaissance systems, but contained 
no funding for development of wide area surveillance. The 
committee notes that persistent day and night wide-area motion 
imagery (WAMI) capability is flying in the Islamic Republic of 
Afghanistan, being readied to support operations in the 
Republic of Iraq, and is considered by operational commanders 
to be a critical intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance 
program for combat units that has contributed to saving U.S. 
and allied soldiers' lives.
    The committee notes the Department of the Air Force's 
November 2014 decision to designate WAMI capability as a 
program of record. However, the committee understands that this 
designation late in the calendar year did not allow the 
Department of the Air Force to program funds for fiscal year 
2016. As a result of this situation, the committee is concerned 
that without funding in fiscal year 2016 to continue 
development of the multi-intelligence capable wide-area 
surveillance system, engineering teams will be reduced or 
disbanded, technical support to deployed systems will be 
impacted, and program improvement efforts will be reduced or 
terminated.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $60.2 million, an 
increase of $10.0 million, in PE 35206F for further development 
of WAMI.

       Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-Wide


                                Overview

    The budget request contained $18.32 billion for research, 
development, test, and evaluation, Defense-Wide. The committee 
recommends $18.54 billion, an increase of $217.2 million to the 
budget request.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
research, development, test, and evaluation, Defense-Wide 
program are identified in division D of this Act.

                       Items of Special Interest


Advanced semiconductor platform

    The committee is aware that a technology capability gap 
potentially exists for full integration capabilities to 
manufacture the next generation of advanced semiconductor 
materials platforms for military systems. The committee 
recognizes that keeping a viable manufacturing production line 
of advanced semiconductor material platforms in the United 
States may be increasingly necessary because of its integration 
into wide-ranging capabilities such as military electronic, 
photonic, and energy systems for unmanned aerial vehicles, 
satellites, soldier equipment capabilities and other defense 
applications. The committee encourages the Department of 
Defense to consider investing in manufacturing capabilities for 
advanced semiconductor materials platform technology that are 
critical to our national defense, through direct investment or 
potentially as part of the Defense Production Act Title III 
program.

Assessment of the directed energy industrial base

    The committee is aware of the growing importance of 
directed energy systems to future Department of Defense 
missions and operational concepts. As developmental programs 
continue to progress, and the potential for acquisition 
programs of record increases, the committee believes that it is 
important to have a better understanding of the industrial base 
for directed energy systems to understand if that sector can 
accommodate future growth in these areas. The committee 
recognizes that the ability of this sector to support future 
demand in the event that programs of record scale up could be a 
limiting factor to the expansion of these technologies. Though 
there are areas where the technology still needs to be tested 
and validated, the committee supports analysis of this area to 
ensure industry can meet the future needs of this emerging 
technology area.
    Recognizing that the Department is required by section 2503 
of title 10, United States Code, to have a program for 
industrial base analysis and under section 2505 to perform 
periodic defense capability assessments, the committee believes 
that the process exists to ascertain the strengths and 
weaknesses in this part of the industrial base. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to conduct an assessment 
of the directed energy industrial base and brief the results of 
this assessment to the House Armed Services Committee by 
February 1, 2016. This assessment should include the following:
    (1) A review of the technical domestic and international 
industrial capacity for components or subsystems for directed 
energy systems, including solid-state or fiber lasers; high 
quality optics, including large aperture optics and beam 
directors; components required for atmospheric compensation 
systems, including wavefront sensors and deformable mirrors; 
pulsed power and other energy systems; and power electronics, 
or other electronic subsystems.
    (2) An assessment of current or planned research efforts of 
acquisition programs to determine if their technology needs can 
be met by the current directed energy industrial base; and
    (3) Recommendations for ways of strengthening or otherwise 
supporting the directed energy industrial base.

Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office

    The budget request included $71.2 million in PE 63122D8Z 
for the Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office (CTTSO).
    The CTTSO identifies capabilities to combat terrorism and 
irregular adversaries and delivers these capabilities to 
geographic combatant commanders, the military services, the 
interagency, and international partners. The committee notes 
CTTSO's track record of success in demonstrating the 
effectiveness of technology when applied to combating terrorism 
and irregular warfare requirements, and that the CTTSO has most 
recently developed several capabilities to counter the growing 
threat being posed by Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant 
(ISIL). The committee remains concerned with the success of 
ISIL's messaging and propaganda, and its ability to persuade, 
inspire, and recruit from across the globe. ISIL's continued 
success on the battlefield depends on this messaging, and the 
group's propaganda attracts recruits and other support that 
enables the organization to persist. Consequently, the 
committee believes that the campaign to degrade and defeat ISIL 
on the battlefield must be coupled with a comparable effort to 
degrade and defeat ISIL's message in the minds of potential 
supporters. The committee believes that the CTTSO is uniquely 
positioned to help counter ISIL's narrative and battlefield 
successes, and to enhance U.S., allied, and international 
partner Information Operations capabilities to mitigate and 
marginalize ISIL's ability to influence and inspire. Elsewhere 
in this Act, the committee includes a provision that would 
provide additional authority for a pilot program to support 
information operations and strategic communications 
capabilities.
    The committee urges the CTTSO to work with the combatant 
commands to provide technological and operational capabilities 
to support the tactical, operational, and strategic 
requirements of the combatant commanders. Further, the 
committee directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense for 
Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict to brief the 
House Committee on Armed Services not later than July 30, 2015, 
on additional counter-ISIL activities and initiatives being 
conducted by the CTTSO.
    The committee recommends $96.2 million, an increase of 
$25.0 million, in PE 63122D8Z for the Combating Terrorism 
Technical Support Office for distinct and focused counter-ISIL 
efforts, global in nature, including support for geographic 
combatant commander information operations requirements.

Comptroller General review of advanced semiconductors and 
        microelectronics

    The committee recognizes that the development and delivery 
of critical capabilities of the Department of Defense, 
Intelligence Community, and other Government organizations are 
dependent, in part, on incorporating rapidly evolving, leading-
edge semiconductors and microelectronic devices into their 
systems, including technologies for which there is no 
commercial demand. Once dominated by domestic sources, today's 
microelectronics manufacturing is largely conducted outside of 
the United States.
    The committee is aware that foreign dependence on 
microelectronics may increase security risks, such as 
introduction of corrupt technologies into weapon systems, loss 
of national security-related intellectual property, and 
disruption of supply of critical microelectronics. For more 
than a decade, the Government has relied heavily on a single, 
U.S.-owned company for sensitive, leading-edge trusted 
microelectronics through the Trusted Foundry Program. However, 
the proposed acquisition of this firm's microelectronics 
fabrication facilities and related intellectual property by a 
foreign-owned entity creates uncertainty about the Government's 
future access to leading-edge trusted microelectronics and 
other advanced semiconductor materials and presents risk for 
Department of Defense programs that rely on these 
microelectronics.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to assess the Department of Defense's actions 
and measures to address the risk of losing access to the source 
of trusted leading-edge microelectronics, and to submit a 
report on the findings to the House Committee on Armed Services 
by March 1, 2016. The report shall address the following:
    (1) What efforts have been made to identify the potential 
impacts to defense research and weapon systems' acquisition 
programs;
    (2) What actions, if any, have been taken by Department of 
Defense programs to mitigate the potential risk;
    (3) What actions, if any, have been taken to identify and 
acquire alternative sources of trusted leading-edge 
microelectronics, or to create new sources through Government 
investments, such as Defense Production Act investments; and
    (4) The use of new or innovative manufacturing techniques, 
such as split manufacturing, or other emerging capabilities.

Comptroller General review of technology transition efforts of the 
        Department of Defense

    The Department of Defense's science and technology 
enterprise is responsible for identifying, pursuing, and 
developing new and advanced technologies to improve and enhance 
military capabilities. The committee continues to be concerned, 
however, about the lack of technology transition that occurs 
between the Department's science and technology activities and 
acquisition programs of record. Previous studies by the 
Government Accountability Office (GAO) and others have 
identified a number of factors that contribute to this 
situation, including insufficient processes and mechanisms 
within the Department to conduct technology demonstration and 
testing, prototyping, and generally ensure that high-value 
technologies are mature and available to be incorporated into 
weapon system programs. In the past, the committee has 
expressed concern that the Department has not put sufficient 
emphasis on technology transition, but the renewed focus on 
warfighting experimentation to support transition and the 
effective use of the Rapid Innovation Program indicate that 
some progress may have been made. The committee also believes 
that funding for up-front acquisition activities, such as 
operational analysis to support requirements definition and 
maturation, modeling and simulation for trade space analysis, 
and funding to support technological maturation to get some 
activities through the ``valley of death'' also make 
potentially valuable contributions to supporting technology 
transition, though the impact of these activities needs to be 
better understood and the return on investment quantified.
    The committee last asked the Department to assess its 
technology transition activities in 2008, but it took more than 
3 years for that report to be completed. The committee believes 
that the landscape for technology transition has changed 
significantly in the intervening period, and a review by the 
GAO would provide a better understanding of the factors that 
affect successful technology transition, and what 
recommendations might be made to improve the Department's 
return on investment for technology transition.
    The committee continues to be concerned that the way in 
which the Department of Defense funds technology transition 
activities, including funding for advanced component 
development and prototyping, as well as system development and 
demonstration activities, may be hampering the effective and 
timely transition of mature technologies into acquisition 
programs. Therefore, the committee directs Comptroller General 
of the United States to review how the Department's research 
and development funds are used and whether this approach to 
funding effectively supports technology risk reduction 
activities, operations analysis, prototyping, experimentation, 
and technology transition. The Comptroller General should 
submit a report on the review to the congressional defense 
committees by March 1, 2016. In addition, the Comptroller 
General should include recommendations for better ways for the 
Department to support the delivery of mature technologies to 
acquisition programs.

Computational Research and Engineering Acquisition Tools and 
        Environment

    The committee is aware of a program within the Office of 
the Secretary of Defense called the Computational Research and 
Engineering Acquisition Tools and Environment (CREATE). This 
program has developed and deployed multi-physics engineering 
software applications with increasingly capable high-
performance computing systems, as well as existing simpler 
software tools, to accurately predict the performance of weapon 
systems in much shorter timeframes. CREATE's ultimate goal is 
to move the Department of Defense away from building and 
testing physical prototypes as the sole means to validate the 
performance of a system, to also include very robust virtual 
prototype design and evaluation, followed by the physical 
prototype validation needed to verify actual weapon performance 
and safety. The committee notes that tools such as these can be 
used to identify and help eliminate design defects and 
integration problems much earlier in weapon systems design and 
test processes, before major schedule and budget commitments 
are made, resulting in reduced acquisition time, cost, and 
risk. In separate studies, the Department has documented that 
each dollar invested in high-performance computing results in a 
return on investment at 7 to 13 times that investment. The 
committee supports such activities, and encourages the 
Department to continue investing in resources needed to develop 
the necessary software tools, as well as the integration of 
such tools into existing and new acquisition programs.

Corrosion control and prevention

    The budget request included $1.5 million in PE 64016D8Z for 
the Department of Defense Corrosion Program.
    The committee continues to be concerned that the Department 
has consistently underfunded the Corrosion Program since fiscal 
year 2011 despite the fact that the Department estimates that 
the negative effects of corrosion cost the Department more than 
$20.00 billion annually to prevent and mitigate corrosion of 
its assets, including military equipment, weapons, facilities, 
and other infrastructure. The committee is further concerned 
that the Department continues to under-resource this program 
despite clear congressional support as demonstrated by multiple 
fiscal year adjustments to the program's funding.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $6.5 million, an 
increase of $5.0 million, in PE 64016D8Z for the Department of 
Defense Corrosion Program.

Department of Defense infectious disease research and development

    The committee recognizes the importance of the role of the 
Department of Defense in responding to a pandemic disease and 
training and protecting Department personnel deployed in a 
theater of operations consumed by infectious disease. In 
addition to response, the Department also plays a critical role 
in funding appropriate research, development, and technology 
efforts to treat and prevent the spread of infectious diseases, 
in coordination with other relevant government agencies. Many 
infectious diseases are spread through human-to-human contact 
and through animal-to-human contact known as zoonosis. 
Historically, the Department has focused efforts on preventing 
human-to-human transmission of infectious diseases which pose a 
national security risk or a risk to deployed forces. The 
committee believes it is also important to understand zoonosis. 
The committee urges the Department to update efforts to 
identify emerging and expanding zoonotic infectious diseases 
around the globe which pose a national security risk or a risk 
to deployed forces and utilize competitive extramural research 
and existing national biosafety laboratories to enhance the 
Department of Defense's capabilities to prevent and respond to 
future global outbreaks or epidemics.

Electronic Warfare Executive Committee

    The committee is aware that the Defense Science Board 
recently completed a report on electronic warfare (EW) that 
found ``the Department of Defense has lost focus on electronic 
warfare at the programmatic and strategic level and should 
recreate the mechanisms needed to develop EW strategies, 
synchronize programs, and advise the Secretary and Deputy 
Secretary of Defense on EW matters.'' As a result, the Deputy 
Secretary of Defense has recently established an Electronic 
Warfare Executive Committee (EXCOM) to provide strategic focus 
and oversight on EW programs, especially at the points where EW 
and cyber are converging. The EW EXCOM will be co-chaired by 
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and 
Logistics and the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 
with an initial focus on EW strategy, acquisition, operational 
support and security. The committee commends the Department of 
Defense for making such a strong move to improve oversight of 
all EW activities, and looks forward to hearing more from the 
Department about how it will operate and key recommendations it 
plans to make.

Enhancing situation awareness for military aircraft

    The committee notes that there have been recent 
developments in commercial technologies that could enhance the 
situational awareness in aircraft by improving displays and 
implementing real-time information distribution, both inside 
and outside of the aircraft. These technologies can combine 
three-dimensional (3D) visualization using camera, thermal and 
satellite imagery, recording and networking capabilities into a 
single cockpit platform that could facilitate mission planning 
and execution. The committee believes that these additional 
capabilities could be critically important in the types of 
high-risk, high-difficulty missions executed by Special 
Operations. The committee encourages evaluation of these 
enhanced cockpit technologies for future use in Special 
Operations aircraft.

High Power Directed Energy research

    The budget request included $30.3 million in PE 63178C for 
Directed Energy research.
    The committee is strongly in support of directed energy 
program development. The committee is aware of efforts under 
review by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA), including the Diode 
Pumped Alkali Laser and the Fiber Combining Laser. The 
committee notes that these programs are at different technology 
readiness levels, including some still requiring significant 
research and development to reach required power levels to be 
effective against certain threats.
    The committee notes a significant increase, more than 
double, the amount requested by MDA in its fiscal year 2015 
budget request. The committee also believes High Power Directed 
Energy programs would receive attention better focused on 
delivering anti-ballistic missile capability at the earliest 
practical date if they were reorganized within MDA. The 
committee recommends these activities be realigned under the 
MDA Director of Engineering and recommends a new program 
element for that purpose.
    The committee recommends $30.3 million, the amount of the 
budget request, in PE 63XXXC for Weapons Technology, High Power 
Directed Energy.

Language translation technology

    The committee acknowledges that the work of the U.S. 
defense community integrally involves the ability to 
efficiently and accurately translate large volumes of documents 
and data, and to communicate and interact with multinational 
partners, security forces, and local indigenous populations in 
their native languages. The best available foreign language 
support services and technology products used by the relevant 
agencies in these communities can be critical factors to 
mission success, and the Department of Defense should ensure 
these services and technology products are available to 
servicemen and women who require translation technologies to 
perform their important missions. Therefore, the committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with 
Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command, to brief the House 
Committee on Armed Services by September 1, 2015, on the 
Department's language translation requirements and programs, 
including the use of commercial language translation 
technology.

Multiple-Object Kill Vehicle

    The budget request for concept development and technology 
development related to the Multiple-Object Kill Vehicle was 
$12.0 million in PE 63178C for the Weapons Technology program 
and $44.6 million in PE 63294C for the Common Kill Vehicle 
Technology program.
    The committee supports development of a Multiple-Object 
Kill Vehicle as part of the long-term improvement of the 
homeland ballistic missile defense of the United States. The 
committee also believes these efforts would be given the 
attention they need to successfully transition to a program of 
record and a deployable capability if they were realigned and 
reorganized within the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) and it 
recommends funding in a new program element to accomplish those 
goals. Elsewhere in this Act, the committee includes a 
provision that would establish a Multiple-Object Kill Vehicle 
program of record within MDA.
    The committee recommends $86.5 million, an increase of 
$30.0 million, in PE 63XXXC for the Multiple-Object Kill 
Vehicle program.

Report on the United States Special Operations Command development of 
        directed energy

    The committee recognizes that directed energy solutions 
have the potential to provide warfighters with an array of 
options beyond the strict limitations of kinetic systems. The 
committee believes that the United States Special Operations 
Command (USSOCOM) should continue to examine procuring or 
developing directed energy technology through their unique 
acquisition authorities. As the Special Operations Forces (SOF) 
community looks to utilize those special acquisition 
authorities, the committee recognizes that USSOCOM may need to 
utilize tailored or SOF-peculiar test and evaluation 
capabilities to support their urgent requirements.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Commander of Special 
Operations Command to provide a briefing to the House Armed 
Services Committee no later than 180 days after the enactment 
of this Act on the command's need for a USSOCOM directed energy 
test and evaluation program. The briefing required should 
include:
    (1) An overview of the current structure, processes and 
requirements used to test and evaluate directed energy programs 
and a measure of performance in meeting time-sensitive 
warfighter requirements;
    (2) Recommendations for how to enable testing and 
evaluation of time-sensitive operational needs and mission 
requirements as part of the USSOCOM acquisition processes;
    (3) Recommendations for the requirements for a capable lab 
or testing entity to carry out such testing; and
    (4) An inventory of the tools and facilities that can meet 
the test and evaluation needs of USSOCOM for its directed 
energy programs.

Research and development work with biosafety facilities

    The committee recognizes that the biosafety level 4 (BSL 4) 
facilities are critical to medical and viral research, and 
provide advanced research opportunities that help protect 
warfighters from biological threats, and investigate outbreaks 
and threats to public health. These facilities, which include 
partnerships with non-profit entities, can assist in research 
to help prevent viral outbreaks such as Ebola, influenza and 
other similar biological threats.
    While the committee understands that the most recent Ebola 
outbreak now appears to be contained, constant vigilance is 
still required. The Department of Defense's work in West Africa 
was critical in containing the spread of Ebola. The committee 
further recognizes that non-profit applied research institutes 
have unique capabilities and expertise in areas important to 
the Department of Defense, such as, rapid small drug down-
selection, formulation and supply under the appropriate 
regulatory controls housed in BSL 4 facilities, and capability 
required for ultimate delivery to the affected population, both 
military and civilian. Therefore, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to brief the House Committee on Armed 
Services on their research and developmental work, to include 
partnerships with non-profit research facilities regarding 
potential renewed viral threats of especially dangerous 
pathogens by January 31, 2016.

Ribonucleic acid technology research

    The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense 
faces significant challenges with infectious diseases, which 
hospitalize more service members each year than those wounded 
in combat. The recent outbreak of Ebola in Africa highlights 
the challenging environment that military forces will be faced 
with when operating in an environment of highly infectious 
diseases. The committee is encouraged by the progress the 
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has made to 
address the treatment for infectious diseases that can benefit 
our warfighters, as well as affected civilian communities 
throughout the world, based on techniques utilizing ribonucleic 
acid (RNA). The committee encourages the Director of DARPA to 
find new opportunities for expanding its research into new 
areas specifically for research and equipment that enable RNA 
target characterization, software development for in silico 
screening of molecule libraries against RNA targets, and assay 
development for in vitro high throughput screening and 
validations.

Simulation training for emerging health threats

    The committee believes that new emerging threats in the 
form of highly infectious diseases such as the Ebola outbreak 
in West Africa highlight the need for new forms of training for 
military and civilian responders to mitigate the spread of 
these infectious diseases. The committee understands that 
Department of Defense-sponsored simulation training 
technologies can provide a full continuum of training methods 
that range from full-immersion to mixed-reality simulation, to 
distance-learning technologies and formats. The committee 
encourages the Department of Defense to continue to look into 
viable simulation training platforms that are portable, enable 
a full range of realistic training, and foster an in-depth 
experience that replicates real-world environments.

Special Operations Forces Combat Diving Program

    The committee understands that U.S. Special Operations 
Command (USSOCOM) included within the budget request for fiscal 
year 2016 a new-start program called Special Operations Forces 
Combat Diving. The committee strongly supports inclusion of 
this program which is designed to provide for the modernization 
and advancement of engineering, manufacturing, testing, 
development, and transition of special operations-peculiar 
diving technologies for special operations and combat divers. 
The committee encourages the aggressive and timely development 
of commercial and developmental underwater breathing 
technologies, diver thermal regulations systems, diver 
communications, tracking and monitoring systems, diver 
propulsion systems and devices, advanced concept breathing 
mixtures, and next-generation combat diver life supports 
systems and technologies.
    The committee also encourages the Commander, U.S. Special 
Operations Command, to develop next-generation diver 
technologies, to ensure that these individual diver systems are 
matured in coordination with the development of USSOCOM's 
broader Undersea Mobility strategy, and in particular, the dry 
combat submersible platforms and prototypes currently being 
developed by USSOCOM. The committee also expects USSOCOM to 
leverage commercial technologies and advancements in this area 
when practical, and to continue coordination with similar 
research and development efforts underway within the Department 
of Defense. As such, the committee directs the Commander, U.S. 
Special Operations Command, to provide a briefing to the House 
Committee on Armed Services by July 30, 2015, on the 
development of technologies and capabilities within the Special 
Operations Forces Combat Diving Program.

Strategic Capabilities Office transitions of technology

    The committee continues to monitor with interest the 
efforts of the Strategic Capabilities Office (SCO) to identify, 
analyze, and demonstrate promising concepts and capabilities to 
counter strategic adversaries. With technologies from SCO 
maturing and beginning to transition from demonstration to 
operation, the committee needs to have a better understanding 
of how those transitions are planned for and executed. The 
Joint Explanatory Statement (Committee Print No. 4) 
accompanying the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 
recommended the development of more robust processes to tie 
these efforts ``to the needs, requirements and priorities of 
the combatant commands,'' as well as ``an estimated cost to 
field the capability, if the demonstration proves successful, 
to support transition planning activities.''
    Recognizing that such investments are still in the 
demonstration phase, the committee believes it is important to 
do as much as possible to plan concurrently for the possibility 
of transition into a program of record for fielded capability. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to brief the House 
Committee on Armed Services by January 1, 2016, on the 
technology transition process for SCO activities. As part of 
the briefing, the Under Secretary should address the following 
issues:
    (1) The status of transition agreements with operational 
sponsors or service programs of record, including the threshold 
for performance for objective fielded capabilities needed to 
trigger or ensure transition;
    (2) The process for doing analysis of alternatives (AOA) 
for those demonstration capabilities to support proposed 
transition;
    (3) Cost estimation procedures to determine the funding 
benchmarks for objective fielded capabilities; and
    (4) Examples of programs currently transitioning or 
transitions planned for fiscal year 2016, including any 
supporting documentation, like transition agreements, AOAs, or 
cost estimation, which may be used for decisions to proceed 
beyond engineering and manufacturing development stage.

Technology supporting information operations and strategic 
        communications

    The budget request contained $33.5 million in PE 63699D8Z 
for emerging capabilities technology development, including for 
concept development of emerging irregular warfare technology 
needs, and demonstrations that have joint and interagency 
applicability.
    The committee remains particularly concerned with the 
success of Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) 
messaging and propaganda, and ISIL's ability to persuade, 
inspire, and recruit from across the globe. ISIL's continued 
success on the battlefield depends on this messaging, and the 
group's propaganda attracts recruits and other support that 
enables the organization to persist. Consequently, the 
committee believes that the campaign to degrade and defeat ISIL 
on the battlefield must be mated with a comparable effort to 
degrade and defeat ISIL's message in the minds of potential 
supporters. The committee believes that there is a critical 
need for technologies and strategies to help counter ISIL's 
narrative and battlefield successes, and to enhance U.S., 
allied, and international partner information operations 
capabilities to mitigate and marginalize ISIL's ability to 
influence and inspire. Elsewhere in this report, the committee 
provides additional authority for a pilot program to support 
information operations and strategic communications 
capabilities. The committee urges the Department of Defense to 
work with the combatant commands to provide technological and 
operational capabilities to support the tactical, operational, 
and strategic requirements of the various combatant commanders.
    The committee is aware that the Emerging Capabilities 
Technology Development (ECTD) program and its predecessors have 
been instrumental in assessing the technology needs of the 
strategic communication and information operations communities, 
and have pursued successful demonstration of some of those 
capabilities. For example, the Information Operations 
Assessment Foundation effort identified best practices in the 
Department, industry, and academia to help develop and refine 
processes and tools for information operations assessments, and 
transitioned to the Joint Information Operations Warfare 
Center. ECTD has also developed an influence assessment 
training capability project for use in both influence 
assessment and Theater Campaign Planning, as well as a Web-
based counter-messaging prototype tool that was delivered to 
the interagency Center for Strategic Counterterrorism 
Communications at the Department of State and is being 
considered for transition to other potential combatant command 
users.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $43.5 million, an 
increase of $10.0 million, in PE 63699D8Z to support the 
development and demonstration of technologies supporting 
information operations and strategic communications. Of that, 
$5.0 million should be applied to countering Russian Federation 
propaganda, and $5.0 million should be applied to countering 
the propaganda of ISIL.

U.S. Special Operations Command Terrain Following/Terrain Avoidance 
        Radar program for MC-130J aircraft

    The budget request contained $35.4 million for procurement 
of the MC-130 Terrain Following/Terrain Avoidance Radar 
program.
    The committee notes that U.S. Special Operations Command 
(USSOCOM) recently conducted an analysis of alternatives for 
MC-130J Commando II aircraft, and that this analysis led to the 
decision to discontinue development of the APN-241 radar and to 
transition to the AN/APQ-187 Silent Knight Radar. The committee 
understands that during contractor flight tests of the APN-241 
modified for terrain following, operators and testers deemed 
the APN-241 unsafe and ineffective for Terrain Following/
Terrain Avoidance (TF/TA) flight, and that any modification to 
the current APN-241 would require extensive redesign and result 
in a new radar system. As such, the committee supports the 
USSOCOM Commander's decision to accelerate transition to the 
AN/APQ-187 Silent Knight Radar program, and based on the 
justification provided to the committee from USSOCOM, 
recommends transferring available funding from the MC-130 
Terrain Following/Terrain Avoidance Radar procurement program 
to higher priority programs in other budget appropriations. The 
committee directs the Commander, U.S. Special Operations 
Command to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed 
Services by July 30, 2015, on the TF/TA radar program for MC-
130J aircraft.
    Further, the committee recommends no funding, a decrease of 
$35.4 million, for procurement of the MC-130 Terrain Following/
Terrain Avoidance Radar program. In lieu of these procurement 
funds, the committee recommends $42.3 million, an increase of 
$15.2 million, in PE 60403BB for continued development of the 
MC-130 Terrain Following/Terrain Avoidance Radar Program. In 
addition, the committee recommends $23.2 million, an increase 
of $5.0 million, in PE 1105219BB for Medium Altitude Long 
Endurance Tactical (MALET) MQ-9 Unmanned Aerial Vehicle 
development. Finally, the committee recommends $26.9 million, 
an increase of $15.2 million, for the continued procurement of 
the MALET MQ-9 Unmanned Aerial Vehicle.

                Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense


                                Overview

    The budget request contained $170.5 million for operational 
test and evaluation, Defense. The committee recommends $170.5 
million, full funding of the budget request.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2016 
operational test and evaluation, Defense program are identified 
in division D of this Act.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

    Section 201--Authorization of Appropriations
    This section would authorize appropriations for research, 
development, test, and evaluation at the levels identified in 
section 4201 of division D of this Act.

    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations


   Section 211--Extension of Defense Research and Development Rapid 
                           Innovation Program

    This section would amend section 1073 of the Ike Skelton 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public 
Law 111-383) by extending the authorization for the Department 
of Defense to execute activities for the Rapid Innovation 
Program through 2020.

     Section 212--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Medical 
                        Countermeasures Program

    This section would limit the obligation and expenditure of 
50 percent of the funds made available for the Department of 
Defense Medical Countermeasures program within the Chemical-
Biological Defense Program until the Secretary of Defense 
provides a report to the congressional defense committees that 
validates the requirements and conducts an independent cost-
benefit analysis to justify funding and efficiencies. This 
section would also require the Comptroller General of the 
United States to submit a review of the certification to the 
congressional defense committees within 60 days after the date 
on which the Secretary submits his report.
    The committee is concerned that the Advanced Manufacturing 
and Development (ADM) program within the Medical 
Countermeasures Program has experienced a program delay of 16 
months and an increase in cost of more than $52.0 million. The 
committee expects the Department of Defense to conduct this 
review and assessment of the ADM program in order to determine 
the future of the program, and whether continuing it in a 
fiscally constrained environment is in the best interests of 
the Department of Defense and the U.S. Government.

  Section 213--Limitation on Availability of Funds for F-15 Infrared 
                Search and Track Capability Development

    This section would limit the obligation or expenditure of 
funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise 
made available for fiscal year 2016 for research, development, 
test, and evaluation, Air Force, for F-15 infrared search and 
track capability to not more than 50 percent until a period of 
30 days has elapsed following the date on which the Secretary 
of Defense submits a report to the congressional defense 
committees. This section would require the Secretary of Defense 
to submit such report not later than March 1, 2016, detailing 
the requirements and cost estimates for the development and 
procurement of infrared search and track capability for F/A-18 
and F-15 aircraft of the Navy and the Air Force. The report 
would include: a comparison of the requirements between the F/
A-18 and F-15 aircraft infrared search and track development 
efforts of the Navy and the Air Force; an explanation of any 
differences between the F/A-18 and F-15 infrared search and 
track capability development efforts of the Navy and the Air 
Force; a summary of the schedules and required funding to 
develop and field such a capability; an explanation of any need 
for the Navy and the Air Force to field different F/A-18 and F-
15 aircraft search and track systems; and any other matters the 
Secretary determines appropriate.

       Section 214--Independent Assessment of F135 Engine Program

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
enter into a contract with a federally-funded research and 
development center to conduct an assessment of the F135 engine 
program and to submit a report containing such assessment by 
March 16, 2016. The assessment would include an assessment of 
the reliability, growth, and cost reduction efforts with 
respect to the F135 engine program, including a detailed 
description of the reliability and cost history of the engine, 
the identification of key reliability and cost challenges to 
the program as of the date of the assessment, and the 
identification of any potential options for addressing such 
challenges. Additionally, the assessment would include a 
thorough assessment of the F135 engine failure and subsequent 
fire on June 23, 2014, including the identification and 
definition of the root cause of the incident, the 
identification of potential actions or design changes needed to 
address such root cause, and the associated cost, schedule, and 
performance implications of such incident to both the F135 
engine program and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Program. The 
federally-funded research and development center selected to 
carry out the assessment would do so by analyzing data 
collected by the F-35 Joint Program Office, other elements of 
the Federal Government or contractors, and the conduct of such 
assessment would not affect the Secretary's plans to dispose of 
the aircraft involved.

                       Subtitle C--Other Matters


Section 221--Expansion of Education Partnerships To Support Technology 
                        Transfer and Transition

    This section would modify the authority for education 
partnerships in section 2194 of title 10, United States Code, 
by allowing institutions that support technology transition or 
transfer activities, such as business schools or law schools 
with technology management programs, to participate.
    The committee is aware that the current statute authorizing 
educational partnership agreements (EPA) limits the educational 
institutions that can participate to ``local educational 
agency, colleges, universities, and any other nonprofit 
institutions that are dedicated to improving science, 
mathematics, and engineering education.'' Historically, law 
schools and business schools that might have technology-focused 
concentration areas have been deemed ineligible to participate. 
By permitting defense laboratories to form an EPA with a 
business school, it would allow the laboratories to work with 
students who can examine technology for its commercial 
potential, provide for early market assessments, and evaluate 
market strengths and weaknesses. Likewise, by allowing law 
schools to participate in an EPA, the laboratory could work 
with law students on patent assessments and legal issues 
involving technology transfer. The committee also believes that 
these kinds of arrangements would create opportunities for 
business students to enhance their skills related to 
commercializing technology using real-world inventions, helping 
to ensure a future workforce skilled in entrepreneurship and 
the creation of high-tech companies. Law students would gain 
experience related to intellectual property development and 
protection that would also be valuable in business development.

Section 222--Strategies for Engagement with Historically Black Colleges 
 and Universities and Minority-Serving Institutions of Higher Education

    This section would require the Secretaries of the military 
departments to each develop a strategy for engagement with and 
support of the development of scientific, technical, 
engineering, and mathematics capabilities with historically 
black colleges and universities and minority-serving 
institutions, and to submit such strategies to the 
congressional defense committees within 180 days after the date 
of the enactment of this Act. This section would also require 
the Secretary of Defense to develop a strategy that encompasses 
the strategies developed by the military departments and to 
submit this strategy to the congressional defense committees 
not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this 
Act.

      Section 223--Plan for Advanced Weapons Technology War Games

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense, in 
coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to 
develop a plan for integrating advanced technologies, such as 
directed energy weapons, hypersonic strike systems, and 
autonomous systems, into broader title 10 war games to improve 
socialization with the warfighter and the development and 
experimentation of various concepts for employment by the Armed 
Forces. The Secretary would be required to submit the plan to 
the congressional defense committees not later than 180 days 
the date of the enactment of this Act.
    The committee believes that there are a number of emerging 
advanced weapons systems, like directed energy, electromagnetic 
railguns, hypersonics, and autonomous systems, that have the 
potential for dramatically enhancing the military effectiveness 
of U.S. forces. The committee has been concerned in the past 
with the transition of some of these science and technology 
concepts into fielded systems, and recognizes that there are a 
number of factors that can inhibit this transition. The 
committee believes that a significant factor is the lack of 
experimentation, concept development and war gaming that can be 
helpful in ironing out the technology, refining operating 
concepts and gaining warfighter trust and confidence in 
untested systems. The committee is aware of numerous historical 
examples in which experimentation with new technologies in 
peacetime have paved the way for their adoption and effective 
use in wartime. The committee believes that increasing 
integration of these new, advanced technology weapons systems 
into existing exercises, either as tangible prototypes or as 
conceptual excursions, could be valuable in promoting the 
experimentation needed to lay the foundation for successful 
technology adoption by the warfighting community.

    Section 224--Comptroller General Review of Autonomic Logistics 
           Information System for F-35 Lightening II Aircraft

    This section would require the Comptroller General of the 
United States to conduct an analysis of the autonomic logistics 
information system (ALIS) element of the F-35 program, and to 
submit a report to the congressional defense committees by 
April 1, 2016 on the analysis. The committee intends this 
review to address issues of performance, cost, and suitability 
with ALIS software that will inform committee action on the F-
35 program in the future. The committee supports the F-35 
Lightening II aircraft program as a critical component required 
to maintain future air superiority and global strike 
capability. The committee also notes that the F-35 Joint 
Program Office and the prime contractor have taken steps to 
address maintainability and reliability issues with the F-35 
that have the potential to significantly improve performance in 
those areas.
    However, the committee is concerned that continued problems 
with the performance of the ALIS element of the F-35 program 
may put the program at significant risk of cost increases and 
performance shortfalls. The committee notes that section 218 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 
(Public Law 113-66) required the Department of Defense to 
conduct an independent detailed review of F-35 software, 
including the ALIS system, and that the subsequent report 
highlighted the potential risks that challenges with the ALIS 
program could create. The committee further notes that as part 
of oversight visits to facilities where F-35 is being operated, 
the committee received numerous complaints and concerns by F-35 
maintenance and operational personnel regarding the 
limitations, poor performance, poor design, and overall 
unsuitability of the ALIS software in its current form. 
Finally, in testimony provided by Department of Defense 
officials at a hearing before the Subcommittee on Tactical Air 
and Land Forces on April 14, 2015, that Government witnesses 
confirmed the same problems observed by members at field 
locations.

   Section 225--Briefing on Shallow Water Combat Submersible Program

    This section would require a briefing to the congressional 
defense committees on the U.S. Special Operations Command 
Shallow Water Combat Submersible prior to program acceptance of 
the first article delivery on the account of schedule delays 
and a reduction of final basis of issue from 14 to 10 
platforms.

                  TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

                                OVERVIEW

    Overall readiness has improved across the military services 
from lows experienced in the wake of fiscal year 2013 
sequestration when only 2 Army non-missioned brigade combat 
teams were ready, the Navy could not deploy a carrier strike 
group, the Air Force grounded 31 squadrons, and the Marine 
Corps reduced its maintenance of barracks, facilities, and 
training ranges to roughly 16 percent of the required ``bare 
minimum'' to protect readiness for rapid deployment. However, 
the committee notes that recovery from these ebbs in readiness 
has taken time, with most military services reporting a return 
to pre-sequester levels of readiness only in recent months. The 
budget request for fiscal year 2016 calls this recovery 
``fragile.''
    The committee is concerned that the ongoing high 
operational tempo being experienced by all of the military 
services continues to challenge this fragile readiness. Many of 
the military services have seen little to no change in their 
day-to-day mission requirements, even with the drawdown of 
combat forces in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. New 
missions, such as the response to Ebola in West Africa, advise-
and-assist operations in the Republic of Iraq, air sorties in 
Iraq and the Syrian Arab Republic, infantry and armor 
deployments to reassure and train European allies, and support 
to embassy evacuation in the Republic of Yemen, among others, 
have kept operational tempos at elevated levels, what the 
Department of Defense calls ``severe deployment demands.''
    The committee is also concerned that Department of Defense 
officials have begun to warn that while current force structure 
and readiness levels allow the military departments to meet the 
day-to-day demand for forces, they would be constrained in 
their ability to provide forces to respond to an unforeseen 
contingency. The committee notes that this is especially true 
in meeting the time-phased requirements of the most 
``stressful'' operational plans. In some cases, due to a lack 
of sufficient ready and available forces or key capabilities, 
the combatant commanders have assessed that they are unable to 
meet some wartime requirements. As a result, the risk to the 
U.S. military's ability to respond to unforeseen contingencies 
has increased.
    To continue reducing areas of acute risk, and improve the 
readiness of the force, this Act would provide additional 
budget authority for multiple unfunded priorities of the 
military departments, to include the restoration of funding for 
operational tempo, flying hour programs, critical skill 
training, and facilities sustainment. This Act also would 
provide additional budget authority for readiness initiatives, 
such as corrosion prevention, control, and mitigation.
    This Act also would make several policy changes to enhance 
readiness and improve oversight. Specifically, it would enhance 
property accountability by requiring a strategic plan for 
excess defense articles, require investment in technologically 
improved replacement parts that would significantly reduce 
long-term ownership costs, and improves the process for 
coordination between the Department of Defense and private 
renewable energy developers to ensure future projects are 
compatible with military operations.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                       Budget Request Adjustments


      Air Force Remotely Piloted Aircraft Training and Operations

    Since 2008, the Air Force has more than tripled the number 
of its Active Duty pilots flying remotely piloted aircraft 
(RPA). The committee is aware that due to increases in demand, 
RPA pilots have had a significant increase in workload going 
back to 2007. The committee is concerned that the Air Force 
continues to experience critical shortfalls in RPA pilots 
despite historical trends indicating continued growth in demand 
for RPA combat air patrols (CAPs) and remains concerned about 
the practice of involuntarily retaining pilots from other 
communities to fill RPA shortages. Most concerning is the 
committee's belief that the Air Force still lacks a viable and 
comprehensive corrective action plan to address critical and 
growing operational and training shortfalls within the RPA 
community as well as the manning challenges mentioned elsewhere 
in this report.
    The committee notes that it has, on multiple occasions, 
tasked the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to examine 
this issue, and the GAO reviews have resulted in a number of 
recommended corrective actions. Despite these recommendations 
and internal Air Force assessments, the committee believes the 
Air Force has not been proactive enough in correcting known 
deficiencies and, in some cases, has disregarded alternative 
recommended approaches that could help alleviate some of the 
most immediate and critical shortfalls. As an example, in its 
report, ``Actions Needed to Strengthen Management of Unmanned 
Aerial System Pilots,'' published in April 2014, the GAO 
recommended that the Air Force evaluate using alternative 
personnel populations such as civilians or enlisted personnel 
to conduct RPA missions; the Air Force did not concur, citing a 
year-and-a-half-old assessment.
    The committee believes the Air Force's reluctance to 
properly resource the RPA community, despite clear indications 
that the intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and strike 
capability of RPA systems is likely to continue to increase, as 
is the scope of tasks RPA units are expected to complete, has 
resulted in an unsustainable operational and personnel tempo.
    To ensure the Air Force is properly addressing this 
critical training and operational aspects of this issue, in 
conjunction with the plan required elsewhere in this Act, the 
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to:
    (1) Assess the viability of using non-rated, civilian, 
contractor, or enlisted pilots to execute RPA missions;
    (2) Develop a comprehensive training plan aimed at 
increasing the throughput of Undergraduate Remotely Piloted 
Aircraft Training (URT) without sacrificing quality and 
standards;
    (3) Establish optimum and minimum crew ratios and, to the 
maximum extent possible, conduct missions in accordance with 
optimum ratios; and
    (4) Identify any resource, legislative, or Departmental 
policy challenges impeding the corrective action needed to 
reach sustainable RPA operations tempo.
    The Secretary shall brief the House Committee on Armed 
Services on these requirements by February 1, 2016.
    Further, the committee recommends $145.1 million, an 
increase of $20.0 million, in Flight Training, Operation and 
Maintenance, Air Force, to increase URT capacity.

                   Base Realignment and Closure 2017

    The budget request included $10.5 million, in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-Wide, to support a request to conduct a 
new round of Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) to align 
infrastructure with planned force structure changes. The 
requested funds would be used to develop recommendations and to 
manage BRAC efforts.
    The committee recommends no funds to support the 
development of infrastructure recommendations prepared in the 
context of a new BRAC authorization.

                             Energy Issues


  Analysis for Additional Uses of Energy Savings Performance Contracts

    The committee notes that the military departments have 
utilized Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPC) to fund 
energy conservation projects for military facilities with no 
upfront costs to the Federal government. The committee notes 
that these contracts have led to a reduction in energy 
consumption and cost savings in installation energy costs. 
While the committee recognizes that the application of ESPCs is 
currently limited by statute to federal facilities, the 
committee believes there may be potential benefits to 
leveraging ESPCs in non-facility applications. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Director of Cost Assessment and Program 
Evaluation to provide the congressional defense committees, by 
March 1, 2016, a cost-benefit analysis for the potential use of 
Energy Savings Performance Contracts in non-facility 
applications. The analysis should consider a case study for 
each of the following categories of non-facility applications: 
aircraft, maritime, and ground vehicles. The analysis should 
evaluate whether ESPCs could be successfully utilized in these 
non-facility applications to achieve energy efficiency and 
financial savings through a decrease in fuel and maintenance 
costs.

               Briefing on Energy Performance Initiatives

    The committee is aware that in testimony before the House 
Armed Services Committee on March 29, 2012, that the then-
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Operational Energy Plans and 
Programs stated that ``we are integrating energy considerations 
into the acquisition process by including requirements for 
energy performance in contracts.'' The Assistant Secretary 
included examples in testimony that included energy factors in 
the life cycle cost calculations, to include fuel efficiency, 
in the competition for the next-generation aerial refueling 
tanker and provisions included in the Logistics Civil 
Augmentation Program (LOGCAP) contract. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to, not later than 
March 1, 2016, brief the House Committee on Armed Services on 
energy performance and efficiency initiatives. The briefing 
should address the following issues:
    (1) How the energy efficiency language included in the 
next-generation aerial refueling tanker competition and 
subsequent control have been incorporated into other 
acquisition programs, and any additional plans to include 
energy-efficiency requirements into future acquisition 
programs; and
    (2) How energy performance provisions in LOGCAP contracts 
have been implemented and whether new LOGCAP contracts include 
such provisions, and if not, the reason for no longer including 
these provisions.

              Briefing on Military Installation Readiness

    The committee is aware that in 2014, the Pentagon released 
a report claiming that changing conditions, including expected 
increased water shortages and instances of wildfire with 
increased drought, in addition to flooding due to sea level 
rise and coastal erosion from storm surges, pose risks to the 
United States' national security. Therefore, the committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense to, not later than March 1, 
2016, provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed 
Services on the Department's strategy and initiatives to 
mitigate the impact of these changes to ensure optimal military 
readiness. At minimum, the briefing should address the 
following issues:
    (1) How are changing conditions affecting operations and 
military readiness at U.S. installations?
    (2) How are best practices being disseminated and 
implemented across the U.S. installations?
    (3) Is the Department of Defense facing any challenges in 
carrying out preparedness and resilience initiatives? If so, 
what are these obstacles and do they require congressional 
action to increase security on installations?
    (4) What opportunities exist for effective public private 
partnerships or contracts with industry to address and mitigate 
the effects of these changing conditions?

                  Collaboration on Operational Energy

    The committee acknowledges that the military departments 
have undertaken a number of initiatives in the area of 
operational energy to increase combat capability, reduce energy 
consumption, and strengthen the energy security of deployed 
military forces. The committee believes the military 
departments should collaborate more closely on operational 
energy initiatives to ensure that innovative technologies, best 
practices, and lessons learned can be quickly and easily shared 
among the military departments. The committee believes that 
increased collaboration among the military departments will 
help align and advance operational energy initiatives, reduce 
costs, and provide greater combat capability to deployed 
military forces.
    The committee notes that the Assistant Secretary of Defense 
for Energy, Installations, and Environment is responsible for 
providing leadership, facilitating communication, and 
coordinating activities regarding the operational energy plans 
and programs of the Department of Defense and the military 
departments. Therefore, the committee encourages the Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment 
to work with the military departments to implement policies and 
procedures to encourage additional collaboration, realize 
efficiencies, and prevent duplication of efforts related to 
operational energy.

      Progress and Savings from Net Zero Installation Initiatives

    The Department of Defense requires sufficient, sustainable, 
and reliable supplies of energy and water to meet its mission 
needs. To facilitate this, the Department has assessed its 
energy security via increased energy efficiency and optimized 
use of renewable energy. Moreover, the Department has stated 
plans to reduce its energy and water use at its installations. 
To that end, the Department plans to increase the degree to 
which it has ``net zero'' installations, or installations that 
produce as much energy as they consume, and limit consumption 
of freshwater resources and return an equivalent amount of 
water back to the same watershed, so as not to deplete 
groundwater.
    In 2011, the Army launched its Net Zero Initiative, which 
it sees as a holistic approach to energy, water, and waste 
management that directly supports the Army's energy security 
and sustainability objectives. In fiscal year 2012, the Navy 
began efforts to determine which installations would have the 
best opportunity to cost-effectively achieve net zero goals. 
Ultimately, the Navy's stated goal is for half of Navy 
installations to be net zero for electricity consumption by 
2020. Also, the Air Force plans to achieve a net zero posture 
for installation water, energy, and solid waste management, 
intending to build upon and complement other Air Force 
strategic sustainability policy and goals.
    The committee notes that legislation has been enacted to 
significantly improve the federal government's energy 
management, water efficiency requirements, and waste management 
in order to save money, reduce emissions that contribute to air 
pollution, and enhance national security. The committee is also 
aware of the Department's need for energy security and 
reliability to support its critical missions, and is supportive 
of its net zero efforts that enhance mission security and 
effectiveness, achieve financial savings, and ensure a return 
on investment. To understand the degree to which the Department 
has identified benefits, as well as challenges, from its net 
zero initiatives, and any areas where improvements are needed, 
the committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees by May 15, 2016, on the following:
    (1) To what extent has the Department of Defense developed 
an integrated net zero strategy for energy, water, and waste 
management at its military installations?
    (2) What impact do net zero initiatives have on maintaining 
mission capability, if any?
    (3) What challenges have installations encountered in 
implementing net zero initiatives or meeting net zero goals?
    (4) What lessons have been learned from the military 
services' and Department's net zero initiatives and how, if at 
all, are those lessons being shared and optimized?
    (5) What have been the costs and benefits of net zero 
initiatives and how are those costs and benefits being 
identified, tracked, and validated?
    (6) How successful have the military departments and 
installations been in implementing the net zero initiative?

                Tubular Light-Emitting Diode Technology

    The committee recognizes that the Department of the Navy is 
replacing fluorescent lightbulbs aboard U.S. Navy vessels with 
tubular light-emitting diodes (T-LEDs). The committee notes 
that these fixtures may consume less energy, realize life-cycle 
cost savings, and provide a return on investment. Should the 
Secretary of the Navy determine that further investment in this 
technology will lead to consistent return on investments across 
the fleet and ashore, the committee encourages the Secretary to 
fully develop an approved products list for T-LEDs that is 
broadly available for use in vessels and facilities. In 
addition, the committee encourages the Secretary of the Navy to 
request updates to the Unified Facilities Criteria and other 
related Department of Defense regulations, to include new 
lighting technologies as an option for vessels and facilities.

                    Logistics and Sustainment Issues


               Auxiliary Personnel Lighter Barracks Ships

    Self-Propelled Barracks Ships, otherwise known as Auxiliary 
Personnel Lighters (APLs), provide housing for some of the 
Navy's ship companies as their ships undergo repair, 
maintenance, and upgrades. The oldest APL craft, built during 
the 1940s, have significant health, safety, and quality-of-life 
deficiencies. The committee believes that many of the APL 
berthing barges are unfit for current and future naval service 
because these craft have well exceeded their service life and 
provide substandard living conditions for naval personnel.
    To help Congress better assess future courses of action to 
address quality-of-life, health, and safety issues associated 
with the continued use of aging APLs, the committee directs the 
Secretary of the Navy to perform a cost-benefit analysis of 
alternative ashore berthing options, in conjunction with, or in 
lieu of, the continued use of APLs, including recapitalization 
or replacement. The committee further directs the Secretary to 
report the results of this analysis to the congressional 
defense committees by February 1, 2016. The committee directs 
the Secretary to include in his report an assessment of the 
current and Future Year Defense Program projected APL 
maintenance and overhaul costs, current habitability conditions 
aboard APLs, and any other information he deems relevant.

               Combat Footwear for Female Service Members

    The committee notes that in January 2013, the Secretary of 
Defense announced a new policy regarding the eligibility of 
female service members to serve in certain previously 
prohibited combat positions. The committee is concerned that 
despite the reality of female service members serving in combat 
for many years, the military services have been slow to field 
individual equipment that is properly sized, weighted, and 
designed for use by female service members.
    The committee believes it is important the Department of 
Defense ensure that female service members have equipment and 
clothing tailored to the physical requirements of women in 
order to operate effectively and not be hampered by equipment 
that is ill-fitting, uncomfortable, and potentially harmful 
during operations in the field. The committee commends the June 
2014 study conducted by the Department of Defense on 
Organizational Clothing and Individual Equipment for Female 
Military Members. The committee notes, however, that this 
report did not evaluate combat boots worn by female service 
members.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a 
report to the congressional defense committees not later than 
February 1, 2016, detailing the availability of combat boots 
that are properly sized, weighted, and designed to accommodate 
use by women across all of the military services. In 
particular, the report should include, but not be limited to, 
plans to provide a greater range of boot sizes and types for 
women service members as well as the advisability and 
feasibility of developing combat boots specifically designed 
for female service members.

                   Continuous Technology Refreshment

    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 
(Public Law 112-239) provided expanded authority to the 
Department of Defense to foster use of technology-enhanced 
maintenance capabilities with working-capital funds. The 
conference report (H. Rept. 112-705) accompanying the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 specifically 
discusses Continuous Technology Refreshment (CTR), which is a 
proven post-production sustainment acquisition strategy to 
acquire technologically improved replacement parts and to 
significantly reduce long-term ownership costs. Despite proven 
cost savings within the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command, 
the committee is concerned that other military departments, and 
even other Army life-cycle management commands, have been slow 
or resistant to implement robust CTR programs.
    The original CTR concept provided a path for industry to 
provide an industry investment solution through a business case 
analysis (BCA) that included a technical description and 
analysis and a comparison of the existing cost of ownership 
with the proposed replacement unit cost, improved repair cost, 
and projected reliability. This BCA serves as the funding 
justification to use working-capital funds for all BCAs that 
show a savings over 10 years. The committee is concerned that a 
departure from this concept in favor of an approach using 
logistics operations surcharges or proceeds from working-
capital fund investment sales has yielded limited return on 
investment. The committee believes that any allocation of 
funding from any funding account or working-capital source 
should face the same BCA rigors and processes and should incur 
progress reviews on status and results.
    Accordingly, elsewhere in this Act, the committee includes 
a provision that would require each military department to 
initiate a pilot program in fiscal year 2016 for CTR product 
improvement under the authority provided in section 330 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public 
Law 110-181). It also would require each military department to 
spend at least $5.0 million in working-capital funds in fiscal 
year 2016 in support of a product improvement initiative as 
described in section 330(b) of Public Law 110-181.

          Decision Analysis Using Readiness Cost Analysis Tool

    The committee is encouraged by the Naval Aviation 
Enterprise's commitment to utilizing the Readiness Cost 
Analysis Tool (RCAT) as outlined in the 2014 Naval Air Systems 
Command Commander's Guidance. Given the potential value of this 
tool in simultaneously increasing readiness and reducing costs, 
the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to present a 
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by September 
1, 2015, on progress toward those objectives through 
utilization of RCAT and other potential uses of this tool, 
particularly any progress toward understanding differences 
between conventional measures of readiness and combat 
proficiency.

                    Defense Personal Property System

    The committee recognizes the difficult task the Surface 
Deployment and Distribution Command has in managing the 
permanent change of station moves of thousands of military 
families each year. The committee notes that in 2013, 
representatives from the moving industry and Department of 
Defense met to discuss a complete redesign of the Defense 
Personal Property System (DPS) online module in an effort to 
make it easier for service members to more accurately track 
household goods and file claims for damaged items, as the 
module has for years been characterized as cumbersome and 
problematic.
    The committee notes that a contract was awarded in 2013 to 
improve the functionality and usability of the Web-based DPS 
system. However, the committee remains concerned about the lack 
of progress in reforming the functionality of the system and 
that the DPS program management office has not issued the 
fiscal year 2015 development schedule to implement system 
enhancements and efficiencies.
    The committee encourages the Surface Deployment and 
Distribution Command to press for greater accountability and 
responsiveness in the development and execution of improvements 
to the Defense Personal Property System.

           Defense Supply Single Point of Failure Assessment

    The committee has become aware of an increasing number of 
single points of failure within the defense supply chain for 
critical parts, assemblies, and sub-assemblies. While the 
committee recognizes that the lack of a diverse production and 
supply system for specialized parts is largely driven by the 
cost-prohibitive nature of maintaining multiple lines of supply 
and the low profitability of low-volume production, it remains 
concerned about the fragility of the supply chain in some 
areas. This concern is especially acute within the lines of 
supply supporting the growing number of aging weapons systems 
in the U.S. inventory, many facing parts obsolescence 
challenges. To better assess the risk to these critical lines 
of supply and to assist with its oversight responsibilities, 
the committee believes a thorough analysis of single points of 
failure is warranted.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to assess and brief the House Committee on Armed 
Services, not later than April 1, 2016, on any single sources 
of supply in support of a major defense acquisition program. At 
a minimum the assessment shall include:
    (1) The identification of any single sources of supply for 
parts, assemblies, and sub-assemblies required for life-cycle 
management;
    (2) Identification of systems that are at high risk of 
having a single source of supply within the timeframe covered 
by the Future Years Defense Plan; and
    (3) Any recommended mitigation or corrective measures.

            Department of Defense Corrosion Control Efforts

    The committee continues to be responsive to providing the 
Department of Defense the tools and resources required to 
address the long-term effects of corrosion on the service life 
of U.S. military equipment. The committee is encouraged by 
Department of Defense efforts to address the preventable costs 
of corrosion and encourages the Department to continue to 
pursue low-cost, commercially available items that have 
demonstrated an ability to significantly reduce corrosion. The 
committee continues to support efforts by the Department to 
review and standardize anti-corrosion policies in order to 
mitigate the negative impacts of corrosion on U.S. military 
equipment.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services 
by September 30, 2015, on efforts by the Department to make 
low-cost anti-corrosion solutions available to the military 
departments and the Department's progress in developing and 
integrating anti-corrosion policies, directives, and standards 
for all items protecting Department of Defense equipment in-use 
and awaiting storage from the effects of corrosion caused by 
exposure to the environment.

                      Depot Maintenance Capability

    The Department of Defense maintains many complex weapon 
systems, such as aircraft and ships, and equipment, such as 
generators and radars, that require regular and emergency 
maintenance by both military depots and contractors to continue 
being available to meet national security goals. The committee 
notes that Department of Defense components are in the process 
of assessing the critical skills and competencies needed by the 
depot maintenance civilian workforce to support current and 
future national security requirements by projecting trends in 
the workforce based upon expected losses due to retirement and 
other attrition.
    The committee recognizes the growing challenge to maintain 
both a healthy commercial depot maintenance industrial base and 
meet the organic core maintenance capability in compliance with 
section 2464 of title 10, United States Code, which requires 
the Department to maintain a core maintenance capability 
involving a combination of personnel, facilities, equipment, 
processes, and technology that is government-owned and 
government-operated and needed to meet mobilization, 
contingency, and emergency requirements.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to submit a report to the House Committee on 
Armed Services by June 15, 2016, that evaluates to what extent 
the Department of Defense:
    (1) Uses core capability requirements to manage current and 
future depot maintenance workloads;
    (2) Is able to provide information that identifies trends 
in core capability workloads at selected military depots, and 
the effects, if any, they are having on capability;
    (3) Engages in agreements such as public-private 
partnerships with contractors and the impact these agreements 
have on the Department of Defense in meeting core capability 
requirements;
    (4) Resources core requirements; and
    (5) Adequately captures core depot-level maintenance 
capability requirements in the biennial core report required 
under subsection 2464(d) of title 10, United States Code, and 
any changes to subsection 2464(d) the Comptroller General would 
recommend to increase transparency within the report.
    The Comptroller General may also include other related 
matters as deemed appropriate in order to provide a 
comprehensive examination of core depot maintenance capability.
    The committee further directs the Comptroller General to 
brief the House Committee on Armed Services not later than 
January 31, 2016, on preliminary findings of the Comptroller 
General's evaluation.

          Humidity-Controlled Shelters and Temporary Buildings

    The committee notes that greater use of semi-permanent 
humidity-controlled shelters by the U.S. military services, 
Special Operations Command, and defense agencies could reduce 
humidity, dust, and other environmental factors that damage 
military equipment, reduce operational readiness, and increase 
maintenance costs. While widely used by foreign militaries, the 
Department of Defense does not have a single, comprehensive 
military specification for such protective shelters.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to provide a briefing to the House Committees on Armed 
Services, not later than March 15, 2016, on a plan to develop 
specifications for semi-permanent humidity-controlled shelters 
that could be used by the military services, Special Operations 
Command, and the defense agencies to protect assets such as 
fixed-wing aircraft systems, missiles, radar systems, and other 
equipment with sensitive electronics that are vulnerable to 
corrosion across the range of environments in which assets 
could operate and be housed, from tropical climates and 
extremely cold weather regions to desert and extremely low-
humidity areas. The plan shall include an assessment of the 
availability and potential use of commercially produced 
shelters.
    In preparing the plan, the Secretary, through the Office of 
Corrosion Policy and Oversight and the corrosion executives of 
the military services, shall coordinate with the Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Logistics and Materiel Readiness and 
the Defense Logistics Agency.

                       Laser Ablation of Coatings

    The committee is aware that the Air Force has been 
utilizing robotic laser systems such as the Laser Automated De-
Coating System and the Advanced Robotic Laser Coating Removal 
System, to ablate coatings as part of routine weapon system 
sustainment. The committee notes that use of such systems has 
resulted in cost savings by reducing the time required to 
remove coatings from aircraft components such as F-16 radomes. 
These savings have led the Air Force to expand the use of these 
systems to ablation work on a wider range of components across 
multiple types of fighter and cargo aircraft.
    Further, the committee recognizes the Navy's Metalworking 
Center has successfully laser ablated steel and has the laser, 
coatings, materials characterizations, robotics experience, and 
subject-matter experts to further develop laser ablation 
technologies and determine return on investment.
    The committee encourages the Secretary of the Navy to 
leverage the synergy, joint technical problem solving, and 
learning-curve efficiencies of the Center's co-location with 
design test and laboratory facilities to determine if laser 
systems could produce cost savings at Fleet Readiness Centers, 
weapons depots, and shipyards similar to those experienced by 
the Air Force.

            Marine Corps Systems Command Engineering Support

    The committee is aware that Marine Corps Systems Command 
(MARCORSYSCOM) has determined that a number of engineering 
functions at its headquarters are inherently governmental in 
nature and has taken steps to in-source these previously 
contracted services. While the committee supports the proper 
alignment of functions that are inherently governmental in 
nature, as required by law, it is concerned that after this 
particular determination was made and engineering services were 
consolidated at the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command's 
(SPAWAR) Atlantic Center, these same engineering services that 
were deemed inherently governmental were subsequently re-
outsourced by SPAWAR to contractor performance. The committee 
is concerned about the inconsistent classification of these 
positions and, if not inherently governmental in nature, the 
potential for inefficiencies and increased contract oversight 
costs associated with the geographic separation of MARCORSYSCOM 
and the contractors providing engineering services. The 
committee notes the Department of the Navy could potentially 
achieve greater synergy and avoid these inefficiencies by 
leveraging the Government's localized engineering capacities 
resident within the Navy's Surface Warfare Center system.
    The committee directs the Commandant of the Marine Corps to 
brief the House Committee on Armed Services by February 1, 
2016, on the status of engineering support functions, both 
governmental and contracted, that support MARCORSYSCOM.

Planning for Critical Organizational Clothing and Individual Equipment 
                               Innovation

    The committee recognizes that modern organizational 
clothing and individual equipment (OCIE), including handwear, 
provides soldiers with a distinct combat advantage, but the 
Army's record of using Overseas Contingency Operations funding 
is not ideally suited to the innovation of next-generation 
soldier equipment. The committee notes that the Army currently 
lacks a single glove system that is effective in environments 
from minus-50 degrees to 100-plus degrees, and the Army's 
Soldier Enhancement Program is presently evaluating an 
integrated glove system with advanced raw materials and new 
manufacturing processes for the next generation of Army 
handwear.
    As a means of providing greater visibility of programming, 
planning, and budgeting for critical OCIE programs such as 
handwear, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to 
submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services by 
January 15, 2016, detailing efforts to program, plan, and 
budget for fielding of next-generation Army handwear systems.

                        Report on Asset Tracking

    The committee is in receipt of the congressionally mandated 
comprehensive strategy for improving asset tracking and in-
transit visibility. The committee supports the Department's 
goal of enhancing asset visibility through item-unique 
identification (IUID), automatic identification (AIT), and 
automatic identification and data capture (AIDC) processes but 
is concerned that only 47 percent of contracts include the IUID 
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations Supplement (DFARS) 
clause and only 16 percent of items across all classes of 
supply have been marked. Any successful asset visibility or 
AIT/AIDC strategy requires continuous identification, 
integration, and monitoring of efforts. The committee urges the 
Department and the services to increase their oversight of the 
implementation of IUID and other AIT/AIDC policies and directs 
the service secretaries to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees by September 15, 2015, on efforts to improve 
asset tracking, including specific steps taken by each military 
service to ensure the use of the IUID DFARS clause in 
contracts.

              Service Life Extension of Emergency Vehicles

    The committee is aware that the Department of the Navy 
utilizes a depot-level maintenance strategy to extend the 
service life of fire, rescue, and emergency vehicles. The 
committee understands that the depot-level maintenance is 
conducted typically 8-10 years into a vehicle's life cycle and 
this service life extension program can extend the life of 
fire, rescue, and emergency vehicles by 10 years and results in 
significant cost savings over the purchase of new equipment. 
The committee is encouraged by the Navy's pursuit of greater 
efficiencies in the fire and emergency service vehicle 
maintenance process and the promise it holds for achieving 
savings and a higher rate of vehicle readiness across the 
fleet. As such, the committee encourages the other military 
services to pursue similar sustainment strategies to increase 
life-cycle savings across the Department of Defense.

                            Readiness Issues


         Advanced Foreign Language Proficiency Training Systems

    The committee believes that foreign language proficiency is 
an essential component of military readiness that enables U.S. 
military personnel to provide strategic warning and critical 
response capability. The committee is concerned that changes in 
advanced foreign language proficiency training programs may 
have an impact on the ability of civilian and military 
personnel at the Department of Defense to support combatant 
commanders and possibly lead to gaps in readiness. 
Specifically, the committee is concerned that linguists at the 
Department of Defense and supporting agencies may be unable to 
perform their job functions properly if they are unable to 
access advanced language and cultural training modules, as 
these personnel are required to interact, speak, and write in 
multiple dialects and social registers of a given language in 
order to adequately perform their varied missions.
    To better understand any potential shortfalls arising from 
planned changes in advanced foreign language proficiency 
training programs, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to brief the House Committee on Armed Services not 
later than October 1, 2015, on any capability gaps in advanced 
foreign language proficiency training within the Department of 
Defense. The Secretary shall also note any shortfalls that may 
arise within agencies that support the Department of Defense.

                   Air Combat Training Range Upgrades

    The committee is concerned by the proliferation of more 
advanced threats to U.S. Armed Forces and potential capability 
gaps in air combat training range instrumentation and equipment 
able to support newer, more advanced technologies, and concepts 
of operations that are being fielded to address these threats. 
The committee also notes the constraints on near- and long-term 
budgets to support high-cost live flight training. The 
committee recognizes, as referenced elsewhere in this report, 
that the Navy is seeking a new range capability to address 
these gaps and shortfalls and recommended full funding at the 
requested level to continue development and deployment of an 
updated system. To improve the committee's oversight of the 
recommended funding's execution and ensure the Department of 
Defense is expending resources in the most cost-effective 
manner, the committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to brief the House 
Committee on Armed Services by September 1, 2015, on efforts to 
develop and employ new, updated range instrumentation systems 
and leverage previous investments.

             Analysis of Continuous Bomber Presence on Guam

    The committee recognizes that the rotational deployment of 
B-52, B-2, and other bomber aircraft to Guam is an important 
component of U.S. Air Force strategy in the Asia-Pacific 
region. This continuous bomber presence since March 2004 acts 
as a deterrent to aggressive actions of nations in the region 
and serves as a reminder of the United States' commitment to 
its allies and a recognition of operational requirements. Given 
the current fiscal environment, the committee has encouraged 
all military services to evaluate current operational plans for 
potential efficiencies and greater measures of effectiveness. 
The committee recognizes the potential for cost savings on Guam 
through the permanent establishment of a squadron or detachment 
of bombers at Andersen Air Force Base (AAFB).
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to 
review the feasibility of, and requirement for, establishing a 
permanent bomber presence on Guam and report the outcome of 
this review to the congressional defense committees by March 1, 
2016. The review should evaluate the impact on operation and 
maintenance accounts and potential military construction 
investments for operations and increased military personnel at 
AAFB, to include an analysis of the cost associated with 
temporary duty stationing of aircraft and crews compared to the 
cost of permanently stationed aircraft and crews. The analysis 
also should consider the impact on aircraft maintenance.

                    Army Explosive Ordnance Disposal

    The committee has been closely monitoring proposed changes 
to the Army's Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) force structure 
and proponency. The committee recognizes the importance of the 
Army EOD force as a unique and highly technical enabler in 
meeting combatant commander operational requirements and force 
presence for counterterrorism and irregular warfare, defense 
support of civilian law enforcement authorities, and support to 
major operations and in contingency scenarios. The committee 
remains concerned that the Army has not clearly identified 
future capacity and capability requirements for its EOD force 
and may eliminate too much of its EOD capacity without making 
needed investments in EOD capabilities to meet the enduring 
needs of combatant commanders. Therefore, the committee directs 
the Secretary of the Army to provide a briefing to the House 
Committee on Armed Services by December 1, 2015, on the Army's 
EOD force. At a minimum, the briefing shall include:
    (1) Any proposed changes to EOD force structure planned 
over the Future Years Defense Plan, including any costs, 
efficiencies, or cost avoidance to include the active and 
reserve components;
    (2) An assessment of demand for Army EOD capabilities over 
the past 5 years, including by geographic combatant commanders, 
for national security special events, and in support of 
civilian law enforcement agencies;
    (3) A list of Army EOD systems program(s) of record, and 
EOD program elements and levels of funding for the Army's 
unique requirements for EOD in research, development, test and 
evaluation; operation and maintenance; and procurement over the 
Future Years Defense Plan; and
    (4) A cost-benefit analysis on any proposed realignment or 
relocation of EOD organization, force structure, training, and 
branch proponency.

        Aviation Support to the Joint Readiness Training Center

    The committee recognizes the importance of the training 
conducted at the Joint Readiness Training Center (JRTC) through 
U.S. Air Force Green Flag East exercises done in conjunction 
with U.S. Army brigade rotations. These exercises sustain 
critical, high-demand skill sets, such as those provided by 
joint terminal attack controllers, and allow both pilots and 
ground units to exercise in a realistic, high-threat 
representative environment. The committee notes that with the 
increasing focus on the Pacific area of operations, JRTC 
exercises have also incorporated maritime training to improve 
the integration of Air Force assets into U.S. Navy command-and-
control structures, and the Army has increased the duration and 
complexity of unit rotations at JRTC.
    While the committee commends these developments, it is 
concerned about the availability of air assets necessary to 
support the increased complexity and duration of Green Flag 
East and JRTC exercises. The committee is concerned that these 
challenges will become even more acute with the Air Force's 
decision to eliminate the fighter squadron at Barksdale Air 
Force Base that has regularly provided air support to Green 
Flag East and the JRTC when other air units were unavailable 
for training.
    In order to better assess the adequacy of planning, 
programming, and resourcing of JRTC training activities, the 
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to assess the 
Air Force's ability to provide aviation support to JRTC 
rotations and exercises, to include an accounting of any 
instances in which the Air Force has been unable to support 
JRTC activities. The committee further directs the Secretary to 
report his findings to the congressional defense committees by 
March 1, 2016.

     Comptroller General Assessment of Army and Air Force Training 
                              Requirements

    For more than a decade, the Army and Air Force focused the 
training of their forces on supporting operations in the 
Republic of Iraq and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. 
Commanders established a range of resource-intensive training 
requirements deemed necessary to conduct missions in these 
locations and de-prioritized training in other areas. In the 
coming years, both the Army and Air Force will confront an 
increasingly complex security environment that will demand a 
wider range of missions, such as defeating terrorist 
organizations and responding to other emerging threats. To 
accomplish a broader set of missions, both military departments 
have established plans to refocus their training to conduct the 
full spectrum of military operations. However, they face an 
environment of constrained budgetary resources until at least 
2021. For example, in fiscal year 2013, the Department of 
Defense's operation and maintenance accounts were reduced by 
approximately $20.00 billion under sequestration. Due to these 
reductions, the Army curtailed training for all units except 
those deployed, preparing to deploy, or stationed overseas; and 
the Air Force ceased flight operations from April through June 
2013 for about one-third of Active Duty combat units and 
reduced the number of larger training exercises. The services 
face the possibility of sequestration-level funding again in 
fiscal year 2016.
    The committee is concerned about the Army's and Air Force's 
ability to balance training investments with available 
resources and believes the services will need to fundamentally 
re-examine the requirements for training their forces. It 
further believes the military departments should explore 
whether they can achieve additional efficiencies or cost 
savings in their training approaches, such as by increasing 
reliance on simulator technologies to meet some training tasks. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of the 
United States to provide to the congressional defense 
committees a report, by April 1, 2016, that evaluates Army and 
Air Force training requirements and includes an assessment of 
the following:
    (1) The extent to which the Army and Air Force have 
established readiness goals, plans, and timeframes to train 
their forces for full-spectrum operations;
    (2) The extent to which the Army and Air Force have 
adjusted training plans and identified resource needs in light 
of their experiences preparing forces for contingency 
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan;
    (3) The extent to which the Army and Air Force have 
considered options for increasing the use of simulated training 
and other technologies to achieve efficiencies or other cost 
savings in their training programs; and
    (4) Any other issues the Comptroller General determines 
appropriate with respect to Army and Air Force training.
    The committee also directs the Comptroller General to 
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by 
March 1, 2016, on the Comptroller General's preliminary 
findings.

      Comptroller General Assessment of Plans to Rebuild Readiness

    For more than a decade the Department of Defense has 
maintained a high pace of operations, and supporting those 
operations has had a severe impact on the readiness of the 
overall force. Today, relatively few non-deployed forces could 
assemble quickly to perform their full mission should a large-
scale crisis occur. In recent months, the service chiefs have 
begun to sound an increasingly shrill alarm about the impacts 
this pace has had on their units and the personnel in them. The 
service chiefs have raised questions about their ability to 
maintain the current pace and rebuild readiness, especially if 
budgets are reduced to sequestration levels. Steady-state 
combatant command demands are high and growing, with some key 
current demands going unmet. Looking forward, demands are not 
likely to recede, as forces are now needed to stabilize 
emerging crises in the Middle East and Eastern Europe. 
According to the service chiefs, it will be at least 5 to 8 
years (2020 to 2023) before their respective services can 
rebuild acceptable overall readiness levels.
    Amid declining budgets and force structure, the committee 
is growing increasingly concerned about the Department's 
ability to rebuild readiness while meeting the persistent 
demands of the combatant commands. To inform its oversight, the 
committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States 
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees by 
April 1, 2016, that provides a comprehensive, independent 
assessment of the Department of Defense's efforts to rebuild 
readiness.
    The reviews that support this assessment should consider 
historical readiness trends and focus on assessing the plans of 
the military services going forward including:
    (1) The force structure planned to meet strategic guidance;
    (2) The goals for rebuilding required readiness and the 
underlying assumptions and analysis behind those goals;
    (3) The departmental or military service efforts to set 
interim goals and assess progress toward those goals; and (4) 
The barriers, if any, facing the military services in reaching 
their readiness goals and plans to mitigate those barriers.
    The review should consider how the Department and military 
services will identify and address key capability and capacity 
gaps across the Department for major combat units as well as 
low-density units and personnel who are in perennially high 
demand. In assessing the plans, the Comptroller General should 
also consider how the Department intends to balance the demands 
of the combatant commands in the future with the need to 
provide a more sustainable pace for service members.
    Given the key role of the military services in rebuilding 
readiness, the Comptroller General should, at a minimum, 
provide reports that assess the plans of the Departments of the 
Army, Air Force, and Navy. The Comptroller General may, at his 
discretion and in consultation with the committee, provide 
additional reports that address recurrent themes across the 
Department, cross-cutting issues, or other issues deemed 
appropriate.
    The committee further directs the Comptroller General to 
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by 
February 15, 2016, on the Comptroller General's preliminary 
findings.

                        Initial Flight Training

    The committee recognizes the Air Force has implemented a 
cost-efficient and mission-effective Initial Flight training 
(IFT) program over the past 9 years for Air Force pilot and 
combat system operator candidates. The committee notes the 
value in program screening and initial training before the 
commencement of more expensive stages of aviation training. The 
committee also recognizes that the Air Force's current approach 
to the IFT program has resulted in a safety record that exceeds 
many industry standards. However, the committee also recognizes 
the significant investments, which are correctly levied on 
industry, that must be made in aircraft, simulators, 
maintenance, highly experienced instructors, co-location at 
military installations, and student support infrastructure to 
enable this approach to Initial Flight Training. Given the 
significant investments required for the program to be 
successful, the committee acknowledges the need for program 
predictability, open competition, and the need to explore a 
similar approach to IFT within other military departments.
    For example, the committee believes that the adoption of 
such a program by the Navy could provide the Navy cost 
efficiencies and training benefits similar to those experienced 
by the Air Force. The committee recognizes the Navy sent an 
initial cadre of naval aviator candidates through the Air Force 
IFT program in 2014.
    Therefore, the committee urges the continuation of the IFT 
program within the Air Force with a continued focus on the safe 
production of competent pilots, and directs the Secretary of 
the Navy to provide the Committee on Armed Services of the 
House of Representatives with a briefing by March 31, 2016, on 
the performance of the Navy's cadre of participants in the Air 
Force's IFT program and the costs and benefits associated with 
the adoption of a similar program by the Navy.

                     Marine Corps Search and Rescue

    The committee is aware that the Marine Corps has divested 
its two remaining search and rescue (SAR) units at the Marine 
Corps Air Stations in Yuma, Arizona, and Cherry Point, North 
Carolina, in an effort to reduce manning and funding 
requirements. The committee is concerned that the divestiture 
and resulting transition of SAR functions to a combination of 
U.S. Coast Guard units and contracted SAR services has not been 
adequately assessed and could result in increased risk and 
increased cost.
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to brief 
the House Committee on Armed Services by August 1, 2015, on the 
Department of the Navy's divestiture plans and actions taken to 
ensure adequate search and rescue capability resides at Marine 
Corps Air Stations. The briefing shall include information on 
specific roles and responsibilities of Marine Corps units, 
Coast Guard units, and private contractors; plans for land-
based search and rescue; and the cost analysis conducted that 
led to the decision to divest organic Marine Corps SAR 
capabilities.

                   Optimizing National Guard Training

    The committee is concerned about the burden of temporary 
duty (TDY) and travel-dependent training regimes on some 
National Guard service members, including those Guard members 
requiring specialized certifications. The committee notes that 
many National Guard members have demanding civilian employment 
in addition to military service. The committee believes that 
the National Guard should optimize training regimes to minimize 
the amount of TDY and travel required to retain certifications 
and currency. Increased use of virtual and constructive 
training, including simulation, may help alleviate some of the 
burden on Guard members by reducing time away from families and 
civilian employment. In order for the committee to better 
understand this issue, not later than September 30, 2015, the 
Chief of the National Guard Bureau shall provide a briefing to 
the House Committee on Armed Services on options for better 
optimizing National Guard training regimes.

Performance and Effectiveness of Department of Defense's Joint Exercise 
                                Program

    Each year, the Department of Defense's combatant commands 
participate in more than 120 training, exercise, and engagement 
events that range from small-scale, unilateral events to major 
joint and multilateral exercises. According to the Department, 
joint exercises are a means for commanders to maintain trained 
and ready forces, exercise contingency and theater security 
cooperation plans, and achieve joint and multinational 
training. These exercises have a primary purpose of training 
U.S. forces, but can also help build partner-nation capacity 
and strengthen alliances. Joint exercises are also designed to 
integrate and synchronize interdependent capabilities, such as 
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, electronic 
warfare, and special operations forces between multiple 
services and commands. Further, participation in joint 
exercises enables the military services to build trust and 
relationships with one another, U.S. allies, and potential 
partners, while developing the skills necessary to operate in 
the joint environment. However, several factors, such as the 
availability of U.S. forces and access to host-country forces 
and territories, can affect the desired outcome of joint 
exercises.
    Given current fiscal pressures and budgetary constraints 
facing the Department, the committee believes that the 
Department must improve efficiency and obtain cost savings 
where possible and demonstrate a return on its investment in 
training and exercise programs. In doing so, it is paramount 
that the Department balance its ongoing strategic and 
operational challenges with constrained resource levels and 
prioritize training investments, such as those in joint 
exercises. In order to better understand the performance and 
effectiveness of the Department's joint exercise program, the 
committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States 
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees, to 
be completed by April 30, 2016, that assesses the following:
    (1) The guidance and processes the Department of Defense 
uses to determine requirements for joint exercises;
    (2) The factors, if any, the Department has identified that 
affect the combatant commands' ability to conduct joint 
exercises;
    (3) The extent to which assessments of joint exercises are 
conducted to determine if combatant command and other 
departmental goals and objectives are achieved; and
    (4) Any other issues the Comptroller General determines 
appropriate with respect to the Department's joint exercise 
program.
    The committee further directs the Comptroller General to 
provide a briefing by March 1, 2016, to the House Committee on 
Armed Services on the Comptroller General's preliminary 
findings.

           Review of the Navy's Optimized Fleet Response Plan

    Over the past decade of war, high operational tempo reduced 
predictability of ship deployments for sailors, their families, 
and the industrial base that supports ship repair and 
maintenance. In addition, deployment lengths did not allow for 
the training and maintenance needed to support fleet readiness 
and maximize ships' operational availability to combatant 
commanders. Further, the Navy has not executed its ship 
maintenance and modernization on time or within budget.
    To address these issues, the Navy began implementing in 
November 2014 a revised operational schedule for its carrier 
strike groups referred to as the Optimized Fleet Response Plan 
(OFRP). The OFRP seeks to provide a more sustainable force-
generation model for Navy ships, as it reduces deployment 
lengths and injects more predictability for maintenance and 
training into ship schedules. The Navy also foresees that 
better scheduling will increase the efficiency of its 
deployments and increase predictability for sailors and the 
repair industrial base. According to Navy officials, this new 
force-generation model is designed to achieve a number of 
benefits, including driving down costs, increasing readiness, 
and maximizing operational availability to combatant 
commanders. The Navy plans eventually to roll out the schedule 
to all U.S. Navy assets from the amphibious ready groups to 
expeditionary units and submarines.
    Given the persistent requirements of the combatant 
commanders, the committee is concerned about the viability of 
the OFRP, especially in light of the growing maintenance 
requirements being encountered as ships are brought into the 
public and private shipyards. Therefore, the committee directs 
the Comptroller General of the United States, by March 1, 2016, 
to review the following:
    (1) To what extent has the Navy identified interim 
benchmarks and made progress toward implementing the Optimized 
Fleet Response Plan?
    (2) To what extent has the Navy established outcome-related 
goals for the Optimized Fleet Response Plan in terms of forward 
presence provided to combatant commanders, personnel and 
operational tempo, sailor retention, training, maintenance, 
readiness, and ship repair costs? What other goals does the 
Navy have, if any?
    (3) To what extent does the Optimized Fleet Response Plan 
provide adequate time for ships to meet ship maintenance 
requirements? What impact, if any, have deviations from planned 
maintenance schedules had on the ship-repair industrial base?
    The committee further directs the Comptroller General to 
provide to the House Committee on Armed Services, by November 
1, 2015, a briefing on the Comptroller General's preliminary 
findings and a final report to the congressional defense 
committees by March 1, 2016. The Comptroller General may also 
include other related matters as deemed appropriate in order to 
provide a comprehensive examination of the OFRP.

 Synthetic Training for Small Arms Weapons Skills and Combat Readiness

    The committee recognizes that synthetic training has become 
a key element in enhancing small-arms weapons skills training 
for U.S. military personnel, while reducing direct- and 
indirect-training time and costs. The committee also 
acknowledges that many synthetic training systems enable the 
collection and analysis of data and metrics that facilitate 
after-action reviews and can lead to improved training results 
while ensuring overall system reliability and success.
    The committee notes that several communities, such as the 
Navy Expeditionary Combat Command, the Navy Special Warfare 
Command, and the U.S. Army Special Warfare Center, have 
implemented synthetic small-arms weapons training systems that 
have proven useful in developing a wide range of individual 
service member skill levels. The committee also recognizes that 
synthetic training systems which utilize science-based human 
performance and cognitive agility programs of instruction and 
techniques can improve precision under stress, reaction time, 
and decisionmaking skills in complex threat scenarios.
    The committee encourages other schools, commands, and 
military departments to adopt more cost-effective training 
systems, such as synthetic training programs, to the maximum 
extent practicable. The committee also encourages the continued 
exploration of neuroscience and resiliency-focused human 
performance training programs in addressing other areas of 
concern, including escalation-of-force challenges.

                   U.S. Army Pacific Pathways Program

    In December 2013, the commander of the U.S. Army Pacific 
unveiled the Pacific Pathways initiative, an effort to make the 
Army more flexible and expeditionary in responding to the needs 
of U.S. Pacific Command. Among other things, this concept 
envisions assigning key elements of U.S.-based infantry 
brigades to Asia and keeping them there for several months as 
they rotate from country to country, conducting training 
exercises and other security force assistance activities. These 
forces would also be available to respond to humanitarian 
crises or security threats in the region. Estimates indicate 
that executing this concept would represent a significant 
increase over currently planned Army spending on military 
exercises in the Pacific. Moreover, U.S. Pacific Command 
currently has other existing capabilities that are potentially 
similar to those envisioned for Army units under the Pacific 
Pathways program.
    The committee would benefit from independent analysis of 
the utility of the Pacific Pathways initiative. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States 
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees, by 
April 30, 2016, on the Pacific Pathways initiative that 
assesses the following:
    (1) U.S. Pacific Command's plans for the use of forward-
deployed Army forces under the Pacific Pathways initiative, 
including roles, responsibilities, goals, and objectives;
    (2) The unique benefits of using Army units under the 
Pacific Pathways initiative in executing those roles, 
responsibilities, goals, and objectives;
    (3) Any duplication or overlap of effort between, or among, 
the Pacific Pathways program and other existing capabilities in 
the region;
    (4) The identified equipment, training, and other 
requirements needed to enable the execution of the Pacific 
Pathways initiative, including estimated costs; and
    (5) Any other issues the Comptroller General determines 
appropriate with respect to the Pacific Pathways initiative.
    The committee further directs the Comptroller General to 
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by 
March 1, 2016, on the Comptroller General's preliminary 
findings.

    Use of Service Contracts for Simulated Training and Associated 
                               Equipment

    The committee supports ongoing efforts by the Department of 
Defense to streamline and modernize combat arms training. 
Further, the committee recognizes that in some cases, simulated 
training provided on a contract basis has the potential to 
offer a more cost-effective alternative to organically provided 
training or traditional equipment procurement. However, the 
committee acknowledges that contracting processes remain 
cumbersome and inefficient and could undermine possible 
financial efficiencies of contract solutions.
    Therefore, the committee encourages the Department to 
explore the use, where appropriate, of service contracts that 
can reduce cost. While the use of a services contract may not 
always be appropriate for the acquisition of complex, military-
unique simulation capability, the committee encourages the 
Department to examine opportunities where this approach could 
reduce the cost for simulated training and associated support 
equipment and increase training capability, especially in 
commercial-off-the-shelf and non-developmental simulation 
capability.

                    Uses of Modeling and Simulation

    The committee recognizes the important contributions of the 
modeling and simulation industry in training warfighters. The 
committee believes modeling and simulation is particularly 
effective and efficient in providing platforms and replicating 
real-world challenges to prepare warfighters for decision-
making at the tactical, operational, and strategic level, and 
inform the development of tactics, operational concepts, and 
the making of Defense acquisition and management decisions. The 
committee, therefore, encourages the Department of Defense to 
make greater use of modeling and simulation technology as a 
substitute for more expensive forms of training and directs the 
Secretary of Defense by March 31, 2016, to provide the 
Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives 
with a briefing on current uses of modeling and simulation and 
potential areas for further utilization.

                             Other Matters


                  Arctic Investments and Capabilities

    The committee notes that as one of seven Arctic nations, 
the United States has a vested interest in the security and 
stability of the Arctic region. With the Arctic becoming 
increasingly accessible and more broadly transited in the 
coming decades by both Arctic and non-Arctic nations, it is 
imperative that the United States be prepared to operate in the 
Arctic region when needed. To that end, the committee notes 
that the Department of Defense released a document outlining 
its Arctic Strategy in November 2013 and the Department of the 
Navy released its updated ``Arctic Roadmap'' in February 2014. 
The committee commends the Department for its focus on the 
Arctic region as its activity in the region increases.
    In order to meet the strategic objectives in the region, 
the committee believes it is important for the Department to 
continue to invest in training exercises, partnerships, 
infrastructure, and capabilities necessary to support potential 
operations in the Arctic region. The committee also encourages 
the Department to continue research efforts to develop security 
capabilities and strategies for the Arctic region. The 
committee notes that the Navy's ``Arctic Roadmap'' provided a 
plan to identify the requirements for an Arctic Center of 
Excellence in Fiscal Year 2015. Once the Navy has established 
the requirements for the Arctic Center of Excellence, the 
committee encourages the Navy to establish the center in a 
timely manner.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy 
to provide a report to the House Committee on Armed Services 
not later than February 1, 2016, that identifies the formal 
requirements that have been established for this center and a 
timeline for standing up the initial capabilities of the 
center. In establishing this center and determining a suitable 
location, the committee encourages the Navy to coordinate with 
other government agencies, academic institutions, and existing 
polar research efforts that can provide support and promote the 
United States security interests.

      Briefing on Retirement and Storage of Air Force One (VC-25)

    Not later than April 1, 2016, the Secretary of the Air 
Force shall provide a briefing to the Committee on Armed 
Services of the House of Representatives on its plan to retire 
and subsequently place into storage the current fleet of Air 
Force One (VC-25) aircraft. The briefing should include an 
overview on the plan to move one of both aircraft to a museum 
owned by the Department of the Air Force.

                       Coconut Rhinoceros Beetle

    The committee notes that the coconut rhinoceros beetle is 
native to Southeast Asia and can cause extensive vegetation 
damage, primarily to coconut and other palms. The committee is 
aware that the coconut rhinoceros beetle was first detected in 
Guam in 2007 and in Hawaii in 2013, and is considered an 
invasive species to both of these locations. In coordination 
with Federal and local agencies, Joint Region Marianas and Navy 
Region Hawaii have developed programs focused on discovery, 
monitoring, controlling, and, to the extent practicable, 
eradicating the coconut rhinoceros beetle populations from 
military facilities and installations. The committee is aware 
that in fiscal years 2014 and 2015, the Department of the Navy 
contributed $3.7 million related to coconut rhinoceros beetle 
response in Guam and Hawaii. In addition, other Federal 
agencies have contributed resources in support of the response. 
The committee encourages the Department of the Navy to continue 
supporting efforts to discover, monitor, control, and, to the 
extent practicable, eradicate coconut rhinoceros beetle 
populations.

                     Deep Water Unexploded Ordnance

    The committee notes that section 314 of the John Warner 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public 
Law 109-364) required the Secretary of Defense to review 
historical records to determine the number, size, and probable 
locations of ocean disposal sites and the types of military 
munitions disposed of at the sites. Under the provision, the 
Secretary was also required to conduct research on the effects 
on the ocean environment, and those who use it, of military 
munitions disposed of in coastal waters. The committee is 
concerned that not all of the ocean disposal sites have been 
identified or fully studied.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not 
later than February 1, 2016. The report should discuss the 
status of the Department of Defense's research to date with 
regard to the effects of ocean-disposed munitions on the ocean 
environment and the feasibility of removing or otherwise 
remediating sea disposal sites. The report should provide 
recommendations with regard to the need for additional research 
and the remediation of such ocean disposal sites, including an 
outline of ongoing or planned future research initiatives, a 
timeline for completion of such research, and efforts to 
remediate such sites.

                Flame Retardant Military Uniform Safety

    The committee notes with interest an increasing movement 
toward prohibiting halogenated flame retardants in commercial 
products because of health and safety concerns and believes 
that the men and women in the U.S. Armed Forces should be 
provided the same protections against potential toxic exposure 
as the civilian population. As such, the committee encourages 
the Secretary of Defense to explore the potential of utilizing 
non-halogenated flame retardants in military uniforms, through 
access to American-made products.

 United States Special Operations Command Global Inform and Influence 
                               Activities

    The budget request included $24.7 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-Wide, for U.S. Special Operations Command 
global inform and influence activities. The committee notes 
that this program will resource the geographic combatant 
commanders military information support operations, as well as 
inform and influence activities. The budget request includes 
increases that are directly attributed to military information 
operational gaps.
    Elsewhere in this report, the committee expresses concern 
with the information operations being conducted by the 
Federation of Russia in Ukraine and Eastern Europe, and the 
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), and provides 
additional authority for a pilot program to support information 
operations and strategic communications capabilities. The 
committee urges U.S. Special Operations Command to leverage 
this authority to enhance information-related and strategic 
communications capabilities to support the tactical, 
operational, and strategic requirements of the various 
combatant commanders, including urgent and emergent operational 
needs, and the operational and theater security cooperation 
plans of the geographic and functional combatant commanders.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $54.7 million, an 
increase of $30.0 million, for U.S. Special Operations Command 
global inform and influence activities to expand activities 
against the Russian Federation and ISIL. The committee further 
directs the Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command and the 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low 
Intensity Conflict to provide a briefing to the House Committee 
on Armed Services not later than July 30, 2015, on global 
inform and influence activities, with an emphasis on efforts to 
counter Russian and ISIL propaganda.

   Weather and Geographic Impacts on Aerospace Control Alert Missions

    The committee recognizes the importance of the Aerospace 
Control Alert (ACA) mission and its role in protecting the 
homeland. The committee also believes that ensuring ACA assets 
can respond rapidly is essential to mission effectiveness. The 
committee encourages the Secretary of the Air Force, when 
making decisions affecting the ACA mission, to consider both 
geographic and meteorological limitations on ACA operations. 
The committee believes such considerations should include 
weather impacts on safety of flight, launch and recovery of 
aircraft, mission degradation, and the impact geographical 
location of aircraft has on alert response times.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations


              Section 301--Authorization of Appropriations

    This section would authorize appropriations for operation 
and maintenance activities at the levels identified in section 
4301 of division D of this Act.

                   Subtitle B--Energy and Environment


        Section 311--Limitation on Procurement of Drop-In Fuels

    This section would amend subchapter II of chapter 173 of 
title 10, United States Code, to prohibit Department of Defense 
funds to be used for bulk purchases of drop-in fuel for 
operational purposes, unless the cost of that drop-in fuel is 
cost-competitive with traditional fuel, subject to a national 
security waiver.

        Section 312--Southern Sea Otter Military Readiness Areas

    The section would add a new section to chapter 631 of title 
10, United States Code, to provide for the conservation needs 
of the Southern Sea Otter while continuing the protections for 
military readiness activities at important offshore islands in 
the Southern California Bight.

   Section 313--Revision to Scope of Statutorily Required Review of 
Projects Relating to Potential Obstructions to Aviation so as to Apply 
                        Only to Energy Projects

    This section would amend section 358 of the Ike Skelton 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public 
Law 111-383) to expand coverage of the Siting Clearinghouse to 
requests for informal reviews by Indian tribes and landowners, 
clarify that information received from private entities is not 
publicly releasable, eliminate categories of adverse risk, and 
limit applicability of section to only energy projects.

Section 314--Exclusions from Definition of ``Chemical Substance'' under 
                      Toxic Substances Control Act

    This section would modify section 2602(2)(B) of title 15, 
United States Code, to add to the exclusions any component of 
any article, including shot, bullets and other projectiles, 
propellants when manufactured for or used in such an article, 
and primers.

 Section 315--Exemption of Department of Defense from Alternative Fuel 
                        Procurement Requirement

    This section would amend section 526 of the Energy 
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-140) to 
exempt the Department of Defense from the requirements related 
to contracts for alternative or synthetic fuel in that section.

Section 316--Limitation on Plan, Design, Refurbishing, or Construction 
                         of Biofuels Refineries

    This section would require the Department of Defense to 
obtain a congressional authorization before entering into a 
contract for the planning, design, refurbishing, or 
construction of a biofuels refinery.

                 Subtitle C--Logistics and Sustainment


     Section 321--Assignment of Certain New Requirements Based on 
                   Determinations of Cost-Efficiency

    This section would amend Chapter 146 of title 10, United 
States Code, by adding a section that would require the 
Department of Defense to assign performance of new requirements 
to member of the Armed Forces, civilian employees, or contracts 
based on a determination of which sector of the Department's 
workforce can perform the new requirement in the most cost-
efficient manner, based on an analysis of the costs to the 
Federal Government in accordance with Department of Defense 
Instruction 7041.04 or successor guidance.

 Section 322--Inclusion in Annual Technology and Industrial Capability 
   Assessments of a Determination about Defense Acquisition Program 
                              Requirements

    This section would amend section 2505 of title 10, United 
States Code, to include in the required periodic assessment of 
defense capability an additional requirement for the Secretary 
of Defense to also determine the extent to which the 
requirements associated with defense acquisition programs can 
be satisfied by the present and projected performance 
capacities of industries supporting the sectors or capabilities 
in the assessment and evaluate the reasons for any variance 
from applicable preceding determinations.

   Section 323--Amendment to Limitation on Authority to Enter into a 
Contract for the Sustainment, Maintenance, Repair, or Other Overhaul of 
                            the F117 Engine

    This section would amend section 341 of the Carl Levin and 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) to require the senior 
acquisition executive of the Air Force to make a determination 
that the Air Force has obtained sufficient data to establish 
that the Air Force is paying a fair and reasonable price for 
F117 engine sustainment, maintenance, repair, or overhaul.
    The committee notes that section 341 was not intended to 
affect any existing contract or options under an existing 
contract that was concluded prior to the date of enactment of 
Public Law 113-291.

 Section 324--Pilot Programs for Availability of Working-Capital Funds 
                        for Product Improvements

    This section would require each of the service acquisition 
executives of the military departments to initiate a pilot 
program in fiscal year 2016 for product improvement under the 
authority provided in section 330 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181). It 
also would require each military department to spend at least 
$5.0 million in working-capital funds in fiscal year 2016 in 
support of a product improvement initiative as described in 
section 330(b) of Public Law 110-181.

 Section 325--Report on Equipment Purchased from Foreign Entities that 
       Could be Manufactured in United States Arsenals or Depots

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
deliver, concurrent with the budget request for fiscal year 
2017, a report to the congressional defense committees on 
equipment purchased from foreign entities that could be 
manufactured in U.S. arsenals or depots.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters


  Section 333--Improvements to Department of Defense Excess Property 
                                Disposal

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
provide a plan for improved management and oversight of the 
systems, processes, and controls involved in the disposition of 
excess non-mission essential equipment and materiel by the 
Defense Logistics Agency Disposition Services.
    The committee remains concerned about the improper 
disposition of excess equipment, especially equipment returning 
from the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) area of responsibility. 
Despite 14 separate reports in 5 years by the Government 
Accountability Office, the Army Audit Agency, and the 
Department of Defense Inspector General (DODIG) on retrograde 
and disposition operations in CENTCOM, the DODIG in November 
2014 again found improper disposition of usable equipment and a 
lack of proper guidance and adherence to policy. In the 
unclassified findings of Report Number DODIG-2015-012, ``The 
DOD Retrograde Process in Afghanistan Needed Improvement,'' the 
DODIG noted that the Department lacks ``additional controls 
[needed] to improve procedures governing the disposal of 
services items'' and ``as a result, serviceable items were 
disposed of that could be re-utilized.'' The DODIG noted in the 
report that of the 134 improperly disposed items, 10 items were 
subsequently repurchased by the Department of Defense. Further, 
the DODIG noted that improper disposition occurred at sorting 
facilities that were staffed with seven times the number of 
personnel ``needed to accomplish the retrograde mission.''

              TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS

                                OVERVIEW

    The ``Department of Defense Fiscal Year 2016 Budget 
Overview'' states that the President's request is guided by the 
2014 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) strategy. However, the 
QDR does not reflect the breadth or complexity of the ongoing, 
simultaneous security challenges and crises, which further 
exacerbates the mismatch between the threat, strategy, and 
resources. This means a smaller Active Duty force, with a 
Reserve Component capable of continuing to operate as an 
operational reserve to maintain strategic depth, which is 
reflected in the President's request. The requested funding 
levels would allow the military to protect and advance U.S. 
interests and execute the updated defense strategy, but with 
somewhat increased levels of risk for some missions. The budget 
included further reductions in the Active Component end 
strength in the Army and the Marine Corps, while increasing the 
Navy's and the Air Force's end-strength levels to preserve 
capability. The committee notes the services plan for more 
drastic reductions in end strength and force structure in 
fiscal year 2017 absent a change to the Budget Control Act of 
2011 (Public Law 112-25).
    The Reserve Components will make minor reductions in fiscal 
year 2016. The Department has continued to commit to funding an 
Operational Reserve Component, but the discretionary caps 
established in Public Law 112-25 will impact the size of the 
Reserves. Based on the fiscal year 2020 end state, the 
continued use of the Reserve Components will remain an integral 
part of the strategy and force. As the Active Components reduce 
end strength, the committee encourages the military services to 
ensure the proper force structure and resourcing is provided to 
the Reserve Components in order to preserve an operational 
reserve. The committee also recommends that as missions, such 
as cyber security, space operations, and unmanned aerial 
systems, continue grow, the military services incorporate the 
Reserve Components into these force structure requirements to 
capitalize on the expertise of the Reserve Component members.
    The committee is aware of the constraints that the Army and 
Marine Corps face in the current budget environment, and 
remains concerned with the planned force reductions for the 
Army and Marine Corps, as well as with the Navy's continued 
challenges manning the fleet while combat and contingency 
commitments continue. This continued stress on the force, 
coupled with potential further reductions as a result of the 
discretionary caps established in Public Law 112-25, may have 
serious implications on the capacity and capability of the All-
Volunteer Force and the ability for the military services to 
meet the National Defense Strategy.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                       Subtitle A--Active Forces


              Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces

    This section would authorize the following end strengths 
for Active Duty personnel of the Armed Forces as of September 
30, 2016:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       FY 2016                 Change from
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
                    Service                        FY 2015                  Committee
                                                  Authorized    Request       Recom-      FY 2016      FY 2015
                                                                            mendation     Request     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army...........................................      490,000      475,000      475,000            0      -15,000
Navy...........................................      323,600      329,200      329,200            0        5,600
USMC...........................................      184,100      184,000      184,000            0         -100
Air Force......................................      312,980      317,000      320,715        3,715        7,735
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
  DOD..........................................    1,310,680    1,305,200    1,308,915        3,715       -1,765
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Section 402--Revisions in Permanent Active Duty End Strength Minimum 
                                 Levels

    This section would establish new minimum Active Duty end 
strengths for the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force as of 
September 30, 2016. The committee recommends 475,000 as the 
minimum Active Duty end strength for the Army, 329,200 as the 
minimum Active Duty end strength for the Navy, 184,000 as the 
minimum Active Duty end strength for the Marine Corps, and 
317,000 as the minimum Active Duty end strength for the Air 
Force.

                       Subtitle B--Reserve Forces


            Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve

    This section would authorize the following end strengths 
for Selected Reserve personnel, including the end strength for 
Reserves on Active Duty in support of the Reserves, as of 
September 30, 2016:


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       FY 2016                 Change from
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
                    Service                        FY 2015                  Committee
                                                  Authorized    Request       Recom-      FY 2016      FY 2015
                                                                            mendation     Request     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard............................      350,200      342,000      342,000            0       -8,200
Army Reserve...................................      202,000      198,000      198,000            0       -4,000
Navy Reserve...................................       57,300       57,400       57,400            0          100
Marine Corps Reserve...........................       39,200       38,900       38,900            0         -300
Air National Guard.............................      105,000      105,500      105,500            0          500
Air Force Reserve..............................       67,100       69,200       69,200            0        2,100
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
  DOD Total....................................      820,800      811,000      811,000            0       -9,800
Coast Guard Reserve............................        7,000        7,000        7,000            0            0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Section 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in Support of 
                              the Reserves

    This section would authorize the following end strengths 
for Reserves on Active Duty in support of the Reserves as of 
September 30, 2016:


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       FY 2016                 Change from
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
                    Service                        FY 2015                  Committee
                                                  Authorized    Request       Recom-      FY 2016      FY 2015
                                                                            mendation     Request     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard............................       31,385       30,770       30,770            0         -615
Army Reserve...................................       16,261       16,261       16,261            0            0
Navy Reserve...................................        9,973        9,934        9,934            0          -39
Marine Corps Reserve...........................        2,261        2,260        2,260            0           -1
Air National Guard.............................       14,704       14,748       14,748            0           44
Air Force Reserve..............................        2,830        3,032        3,032            0          202
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
  DOD Total....................................       77,414       77,005       77,005            0         -409
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Section 413--End Strengths for Military Technicians (Dual Status)

    This section would authorize the following end strengths 
for military technicians (dual status) as of September 30, 
2016:


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       FY 2016                 Change from
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
                    Service                        FY 2015                  Committee
                                                  Authorized    Request       Recom-      FY 2016      FY 2015
                                                                            mendation     Request     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard............................       27,210       26,099       26,099            0       -1,111
Army Reserve...................................        7,895        7,395        7,395            0         -500
Air National Guard.............................       21,792       22,104       22,104            0          312
Air Force Reserve..............................        9,789        9,814        9,814            0           25
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
  DOD Total....................................       66,686       65,412       65,412            0       -1,274
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Section 414--Fiscal Year 2016 Limitation on Number of Non-Dual Status 
                              Technicians

    This section would establish the maximum end strengths for 
the Reserve Components of the Army and Air Force for non-dual 
status technicians as of September 30, 2016:


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       FY 2016                 Change from
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
                    Service                        FY 2015                  Committee
                                                  Authorized    Request       Recom-      FY 2016      FY 2015
                                                                            mendation     Request     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard............................        1,600        1,600        1,600            0            0
Air National Guard.............................          350          350          350            0            0
Army Reserve...................................          595          595          595            0            0
Air Force Reserve..............................           90           90           90            0            0
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
  DOD Total....................................        2,635        2,635        2,635            0            0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Section 415--Maximum Number of Reserve Personnel Authorized To Be on 
                  Active Duty for Operational Support

    This section would authorize, as required by section 115(b) 
of title 10, United States Code, the maximum number of Reserve 
Component personnel who may be on Active Duty or full-time 
National Guard duty during fiscal year 2016 to provide 
operational support. The personnel authorized here do not count 
against the end strengths authorized by section 401 or section 
412 of this Act unless the duration on Active Duty exceeds the 
limitations in section 115(b)(2) of title 10, United States 
Code.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       FY 2016                 Change from
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
                    Service                        FY 2015                  Committee
                                                  Authorized    Request       Recom-      FY 2016      FY 2015
                                                                            mendation     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


                    Section 421--Military Personnel

    This section would authorize appropriations for military 
personnel at the levels identified in the funding table in 
section 4401 of division D of this Act.

                   TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY

                                OVERVIEW

    The committee continues to be concerned with the Department 
of Defense's efforts to effectively manage the force but also 
understands the difficult budget environment in which the All-
Volunteer Force must remain viable. Therefore, the committee 
would provide authority for the Secretaries of the military 
departments to develop pilot programs to provide additional 
recruitment incentives and to expand career flexibility 
programs to enhance retention of service members in order to 
recruit and retain the best qualified service members. Also, 
the committee would provide the authority, as recommended by 
the Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization 
Commission, to streamline and consolidate the number of Reserve 
Component status authorities under which Reserve Components 
members may be called to Active Duty.
    In support of military members and their families, the 
committee would provide assistance to local educational 
agencies that are impacted by the enrollment of dependent 
children of military members and Department of Defense civilian 
employees. In addition, the committee would include students 
with a parent who is a member of the Armed Forces on Active 
Duty with those for which States must include separate 
measurable annual objectives for continuous and substantial 
improvement, as recommended by the Military Compensation and 
Retirement Modernization Commission.
    To further improve sexual assault prevention and response, 
the committee would direct the development of a strategy to 
prevent retaliation against members of the Armed Forces who 
report or intervene on behalf of a victim of sexual assault. 
The committee would make improvements to the Special Victim's 
Counsel Program, including authority to provide Special 
Victim's Counsel to Department of Defense civilian employees 
who are victims of sexual assault. The committee would further 
require improvements to sexual assault prevention and response 
when victims of sexual assault are male members of the Armed 
Forces.
    To continue the committee's focus on assisting military 
personnel who are transitioning out of the military services, 
the committee would establish a Training and Post-Service 
Placement Executive Committee within the Department of Defense-
Department of Veterans Affairs Joint Executive Committee.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


           Air Force Remotely Piloted Aircraft Manning Issues

    The committee is concerned about the Air Force's management 
of critical shortfalls in training remotely piloted aircraft 
(RPA) pilots and system operators. Demand for combat air 
patrols continues to increase, resulting in an unsustainable 
operation tempo and exodus from the service of trained RPA 
pilots and operators. Therefore, the committee directs the 
Secretary of the Air Force to provide a briefing to the House 
Committee on Armed Services by January 1, 2016, with a complete 
human capital plan detailing the measures taken to mitigate the 
shortfalls in manning of RPA weapon systems. Specifically, the 
briefing shall address: (1) strategies and actual programs in 
place to increase manning in training, increase retention of 
RPA operations personnel, increase crew ratios, and maintain a 
sustainable recruiting and retention program; and (2) a 
projected date by which the Air Force believes it will have 
mitigated the manning shortfall challenges that reside in the 
RPA community today.

                   Alcohol Abuse Prevention Programs

    The committee commends the Department of Defense and the 
military services for the robust programs available to service 
members and their families to prevent as well as treat alcohol 
abuse. The committee is aware that innovations to assist with 
prevention programs, such as personal breath alcohol monitoring 
devices, are available to further enhance the effectiveness of 
prevention programs. The committee encourages the Department of 
Defense and the military services to continually assess 
innovative methods to increase the effectiveness of alcohol 
abuse prevention programs.

                 Assistance to Local Education Agencies

    The committee commends the Department of Defense for its 
commitment to assist local education agencies over the past 10 
years as the military services made significant changes to 
force structure affecting many installations and communities. 
Section 574 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364) required the 
Secretary of Defense to create a plan to provide assistance to 
local educational agencies that experience growth in the 
enrollment of military dependent students as a result of any 
force structure changes, the relocation of a military unit, or 
the closure or realignment of military installations pursuant 
to defense base closure and realignment under the base closure 
laws. The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense and 
Secretaries of the military departments to continue to follow 
that plan since force structure changes and unit relocations 
will continue for the foreseeable future.

                    Commissary Transportation Costs

    The committee is aware of ongoing efforts by the Defense 
Commissary Agency (DeCA) to reduce commissary costs. The 
committee is concerned that these efforts will raise costs for 
military families, especially for junior officers and enlisted 
troops, and will also adversely affect military readiness.
    The committee urges DeCA to find alternative methods to 
control costs, and the committee further directs the Secretary 
of Defense to submit, not later than October 1, 2015, a written 
report to the congressional defense committees on the effects 
that DeCA's current proposal to limit second destination 
transportation funding and transport volume will have on the 
rates charged by the Transportation Working Capital Fund for 
transportation, especially to the Pacific region, as well as 
USTRANSCOM's ability to maintain surge airlift capability 
through the Defense Transportation System. The Secretary shall 
also include a review of possible efficiencies that could be 
realized in air transportation contracts dealing with second 
destination transportation funding.
    The committee strongly encourages DeCA to maintain current 
sourcing policies at commissaries in Asia and the Pacific until 
these and other investigations into different commissary reform 
ideas have been completed.

  Comptroller General Report on Nutrition Assistance for Active Duty 
                   Service Members and Their Families

    The Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization 
Commission recommended in its January 2015 report that the 
Department of Defenses' Family Subsistence Supplemental 
Allowances program be disbanded for service members located in 
U.S. States and territories, and replaced by the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 
Program. However, the committee is concerned that there may be 
a continued need for nutritional assistance among service 
members and their families.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to review the nutritional programs available 
to Active Duty service members and their dependents. The 
Comptroller General should provide a briefing to the House 
Committee on Armed Services by March 31, 2016, on preliminary 
findings, with a report to follow on a date agreed to at the 
time of the briefing. The review should address the following:
    (1) An assessment of the nutritional assistance programs 
available to service members and their families.
    (2) An assessment of the extent to which service members 
and their families rely upon nutritional assistance programs to 
supplement their nutritional needs.
    (3) An assessment of whether changes are needed to the 
system of nutritional assistance programs available for service 
members and their families' nutritional needs.

  Comptroller General Review of the Federal Voting Assistance Program

    The committee notes that the purpose of the Federal Voting 
Assistance Program (FVAP) is to ensure that military personnel, 
their dependents, as well as overseas citizens are guaranteed 
the right to vote by absentee ballot in federal elections, in 
accordance with the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee 
Voting Act (UOCAVA).
    The committee applauds the great strides that have been 
made improving overseas and military voting, especially with 
the enactment of the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment 
(MOVE) Act in 2009, which significantly improved many parts of 
the voting process for military and overseas voters. However, 
the committee believes that continued management and attention 
to FVAP still remains a priority and routine oversight should 
continue. Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller 
General of the United States to provide a report to the 
Committees on Armed Service of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives, no later than March 1, 2016 that addresses the 
following questions:
    (1) To what extent has the Department of Defense 
implemented previous GAO recommendations pertaining to the 
Department of Defense's efforts to facilitate registration, 
voting options, and ballot transmission methods for UOCAVA 
voters?
    (2) To what extent has the Department of Defense evaluated 
its absentee voting program and achieved the goals of the 
Federal Voting Assistance Program?
    (3) To what extent do challenges remain regarding the 
effectiveness and efficiency of the Department of Defense's 
absentee voting program?
    (4) Recommend, if any, additional legislative authorities 
to address the challenges facing the Federal Voting Assistance 
Program.

                   DACA Impact on Military Readiness

    The committee is concerned with the increasing challenge of 
recruiting eligible people to enlist in the military and 
believes an evaluation of how recent Executive Actions 
regarding Deferred Action and prosecutorial discretion for 
undocumented immigrants currently residing in the U.S. may 
impact the ability of the Department of Defense to recruit new 
military enlistments. Therefore, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to evaluate whether allowing those who are 
considered Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals could expand 
the pool of potential recruits, and an estimation of how making 
eligible for enlistment of DACA applicants would impact 
military readiness. The Secretary of Defense shall provide the 
results of the evaluation in a briefing to the Committee on 
Armed Services of the House of Representative no later than 
December 1, 2015.

             Diversity in Department of Defense Advertising

    The committee continues to support efforts by the services 
to ensure diversity among the force. The committee remains 
concerned that the efforts by the services to ensure that our 
Nation's military is reflective of American society are being 
reduced by the use of advertising that does not adequately 
target minority communities. The committee understands the 
challenges that the services are facing, but urges the services 
to maintain, and where possible, increase their advertising 
within minority communities, to support their commitment to 
ensuring a strong diverse force. To adequately reach minority 
communities, the services are encouraged to use minority owned 
media outlets and advertising agencies that have demonstrated 
an ability to connect with minority communities. Recruitment 
advertising within minority communities is an important avenue 
toward building interest and understanding in serving our 
Nation in uniform. The committee urges the services and the 
Department of Defense to maintain a commitment to diversity 
recruiting and retention. Therefore, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing, by March 1, 2016, 
to the House committee on Armed Services on the efforts 
undertaken by the Department to increase marketing and 
advertising efforts to adequately reach minority communities.

           Improvements to the Transition Assistance Program

    The committee commends the Department of Defense for its 
commitment to help service members and their families prepare 
for a successful transition to civilian life. In particular, 
the committee commends the Department's partnership with the 
Department of Labor, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and 
the Small Business Administration to maintain the transition 
assistance program, known as Transition GPS (Goals, Plans, 
Success).
    In order to further improve the services provided through 
Transition GPS, the committee encourages the Department to 
review the core curriculum for the program to reevaluate 
whether the curriculum accurately addresses the needs of 
transitioning service members. The committee also encourages 
State One-Stop Career Center employees to attend Transition GPS 
classes to improve their personal connections with veterans in 
order to better serve that population. In addition, the 
committee believes that coordination between State Departments 
of Labor and Veteran Affairs is important to the successful 
implementation of the Jobs for Veterans State Grant program 
which provides, among other things, specialized services to 
veterans with significant barriers to employment. Further, the 
committee encourages State-level departments to work together 
in the administration and implementation of the program to 
better utilize the unique expertise for understanding the 
challenges veterans face that the State Veterans Affairs office 
may offer.

               Increasing Diversity in Military Academies

    The committee is encouraged by the advancements made by 
Department of Defense to improve diversity representation at 
our military academies and is encouraged to continue efforts to 
increase minority participation at military academies. The 
committee is concerned regarding current under-representation 
of minorities in our military academies and officer corps, and 
directs the Secretary of Defense to evaluate how efforts and 
guidance to improve minority officer recruitment across all 
military academies can be improved to increase diversity in the 
military at the officer level and brief the Committee on Armed 
Services of the House of Representatives by October 1, 2015.

  Inspector General Report on Separation of Members Who Made a Sexual 
                             Assault Report

    The committee is concerned about early discharges of 
service members who have made a report of sexual assault. The 
committee directs the Department of Defense Inspector General 
to conduct a review of all separations of service members who 
have made an unrestricted report of sexual assault since 
January 1, 2002. This review should address the type of 
separation, in cases where the member was separated on the 
grounds of having a personality or adjustment disorder, whether 
the separation was carried out in compliance with Department of 
Defense Instruction 1332.14 and any other applicable Department 
of Defense regulations, directives, and policies. The committee 
directs the Inspector General to submit a report on the 
findings of its review to the congressional defense committees 
by May 1, 2016.

       Installation Access for Regular College Student Counseling

    The committee recognizes the importance of education 
opportunities for service members and their families and the 
ability of service members to use their earned education 
benefits. However, the committee is concerned that military 
students using their education benefits to attend college or 
take classes on-line may need more timely face-to-face access 
to their school counselors on military installations.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to brief the Committee on Armed Services of the House of 
Representatives by March 1, 2016, on a review of the 
instructions, policies, and agreements regarding installation 
access for representatives of institutions whose students 
receive tuition assistance funding, in order to enable student 
access to regular face-to-face counseling from their school 
representatives. The briefing shall include the results of the 
review of installation access policies and whether the 
Department of Defense installation access policies are 
consistent across the armed services.

             National Military Dependent Student Identifier

    The committee notes the Military Compensation and 
Retirement Modernization Commission recommendation to establish 
a national military dependent student identifier to enable 
consistent reporting on attendance and academic performance of 
military dependent students. The committee understands that 
H.R. 5, Student Success Act, currently pending consideration by 
the House, includes a provision that would address the 
commission's recommendation. The committee strongly supports 
inclusion of a national military dependent student identifier 
in H.R. 5.

                 O-6 Command Selection Board Processes

    The committee recognizes that the selection of commanders 
in the military is intended to place the best qualified 
individuals into command positions. The committee also 
recognizes that the officer promotion process is governed by 
law to ensure it selects the best qualified leaders to fight 
and win the nation's wars and is fair, meritocratic, 
transparent, and accountable. Additionally, the opportunity to 
command at the 0-6 level is often an important assignment 
making an O-6 competitive for further promotion. The O-6 
command select process is not a promotion board, but the 
outcomes can have a similar effect by opening or closing the 
door for O-7.
    The services have different processes for 0-6 command and 
the committee understands those processes may have changed over 
the last few decades. The committee is interested in the 
current processes used by the services to identify and select 
the best qualified officers for O-6 command, particularly in 
operational billets, and the objectivity, merit based approach, 
fairness, and transparency of those processes. The committee 
goal is to reinforce the intent that the best qualified are 
chosen to command. The committee is further interested in the 
criteria that defines best qualified.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to submit an unclassified report to the House Committee on 
Armed Services not later than December 31, 2015 on the specific 
procedures and standards by which each of the services select 
individuals for O-6 level command.
    The report should provide details on: selection criteria 
for O-6 command; procedures/processes for placement of selected 
candidates into command billets; how is selection criteria 
crafted; how is it approved; what guidance is given to board 
evaluators; an assessment of objective and subjective 
standards; whether O-6 command candidates are ranked based on a 
list of qualification; ratios of selected to available command 
billets; alternate procedures, if any; under what criteria 
would a specific command list be bypassed and another officer 
chosen; are there exceptions to selecting candidates who are 
not on the command list; and the report will also include the 
number of eligible women and minorities who participated in the 
O-6 command select process in the last 10 years and their rate 
of earning an 0-6 command assignment vs the rate of male, non-
minority candidates.
    The report should also discuss the transparency of 
explanations for selections and non-selections, the mechanics 
and time length of appeals processes, and a review of commonly 
applied statutes which inform the selection process.

Protection of Child Custody Arrangements for Parents Who Are Members of 
                            the Armed Forces

    The committee notes that the Carl Levin and Howard P. 
``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) included section 566 which 
amends title II of the Service Members Civil Relief Act (50 
U.S.C. app. 521) to require a court that issued a temporary 
custody order based solely on the deployment or anticipated 
deployment of a service member to reinstate the custody order 
that was in effect immediately preceding the temporary order, 
unless the court finds reinstatement is not in the best 
interest of the child, in addition to prohibiting a court from 
using deployment or the possibility of deployment as the sole 
factor when determining the best interest of a child. To ensure 
full dissemination of these protections, the committee strongly 
encourages the Secretary of Defense to notify all State 
attorneys general of the United States regarding the passage 
and implementation of the Act. Additionally, the committee 
strongly encourages the Department of Defense to educate 
service members on the above changes in federal law and their 
parental rights as members of the armed forces.

        Recognizing the Value of the Military Commissary Benefit

    The committee recognizes that commissary and exchange 
benefits have substantial value to Active Duty and retired 
military personnel. The committee encourages the Department of 
Defense to note the Military Compensation and Retirement 
Modernization Commission's conclusion that ``commissaries and 
exchanges are considered by many to be a relevant and important 
contributor to military quality of life.'' The committee also 
encourages the Department to take into consideration the 
recommendations of the Commission and the Review of Management, 
Food, and Pricing Options for the Defense Commissary System 
report required by section 634 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. 
``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) and find ways to improve the 
commissary and exchange system without increasing the prices of 
groceries and other items sold at cost or reducing commissary 
hours of operation.

              Religious Accommodations in the Armed Forces

    The committee acknowledges the amendments made by the 
Department of Defense to Department of Defense Instruction 
1300.17 to implement the conscience protections passed in the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public 
Law 113-66) and to amend the accommodation process for service 
members seeking an accommodation for religious reasons.
    The committee urges the Department of Defense to ensure 
that the review and determination of religious accommodation 
requests are made quickly, efficiently, and in the least 
restrictive manner to the service member requesting the 
accommodation. Unless there is a demonstrated, unavoidable, and 
immediate impact on compelling government interests in military 
readiness, unit cohesion, and good order and discipline, the 
free exercise of a service member seeking an accommodation must 
not be substantially burdened as a condition of seeking an 
accommodation or while an accommodation request is pending. 
Once granted, an accommodation should presumptively remain in 
place unless continuing to accommodate the specific service 
member will have a demonstrated and unavoidable impact on 
compelling government interests in military readiness, unit 
cohesion, and good order and discipline.

                  Report on Female Muslim Garb Policy

    Section 563 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
(NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2003, (P.L. 107-314) prohibits requiring 
or encouraging United States military servicewomen to wear 
traditional female Muslim garb called an abaya or abaya head 
scarf when stationed in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Current 
law also prohibits any funds from being used to purchase abayas 
and abaya head scarves.
    The committee recognizes that in the last 13 years, there 
is an increased United States military presence in nations 
where women are not treated equally and/or wear traditional 
Muslim clothing and/or headscarves. Additionally, Department of 
Defense civilians and contractors may be assigned in Saudi 
Arabia and not covered by the current prohibitions.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not 
later than September 30, 2015 detailing the current policies, 
instructions, and practices regarding the wearing of Muslim 
garb by female members of the Armed Forces and female civilian 
and contractor employees of the Department of Defense when 
serving overseas. This report should include: the policy or 
instruction given for each individual country or region for 
which a policy exists; details on how and when the instructions 
are given; whether the garb is optional; the intended purpose 
of wearing the garb; what level of authority directs the 
policy; if not a policy or instruction, what practices are 
allowed or encouraged pertaining to wear of the garb, and 
whether taxpayer money was used to procure any of these 
garments. If required, the Secretary can submit a classified 
supplement to this report.

  Report on Performance and Efficiency of Incorporation of Community-
   based Transition Programs in the Department of Defense Transition 
                           Assistance Program

    The committee notes that some installations have partnered 
with local non-profit and community based transition support 
organizations to enhance the Transition Assistance Program 
curriculum with great success, especially for those leaving the 
service and remaining in the local area. Therefore the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to brief the House 
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2016, on 
the feasibility of expanding this model of partnering with 
local community based support organizations department-wide to 
enhance the Transition Assistance Program.

   Report on Prisoner of War and Missing in Action Declassification 
                               Procedures

    The committee is encouraged by the progress the new Defense 
POW/MIA Accounting Agency (DPAA) has made in integrating the 
former accounting agencies, the Joint Prisoner of War/Missing 
in Action Accounting Command and the Defense Prisoner of War/
Missing Personnel Office. In its effort to streamline the 
personnel accounting community and provide more transparency to 
the families of those missing, the committee urges the 
Secretary of Defense to pay particular attention to how DPAA 
communicates and shares information with family members, 
regardless of whether the family member is a part of a formal 
organization, and the declassification procedures for documents 
more than 25 years old that have a reasonable expectation of 
aiding in the location of persons missing in action.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, 
as part of the reorganization of the Defense POW/MIA Accounting 
Agency, to submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services 
of the Senate and the House of Representatives by March 1, 
2016, identifying specific inefficiencies with regard to the 
process for the declassification of documents that if 
addressed, could better guide recovery efforts.
    The report shall include the identification of challenges 
in current declassification procedures; recommendations to 
expedite procedures for interagency declassification; 
recommendations for procedures to declassify redacted portions 
of previously released documents; recommendations of safeguards 
to prevent the declassification of documents where such 
declassification may be harmful to national security; 
recommendations for an expedited procedure for private citizens 
to request an explanation of documents that will remain 
classified; and recommendations for procedures to facilitate 
communication with foreign agencies responsible for the 
recovery of persons missing in action.

               Rulemaking Under the Military Lending Act

    The committee recognizes the progress that Department of 
Defense has made since consumer protections for service members 
and their dependents against predatory lending were enacted in 
the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364) and codified in section 987 of 
title 10, United States Code, better known as The Military 
Lending Act (MLA). The committee also recognizes that although 
the law has been largely effective in curbing predatory lending 
to covered borrowers, some predatory lenders have modified 
their products to avoid coverage by the Department's rules 
implementing section 987. The committee commends the Secretary 
of Defense for maintaining vigilance in a continuing effort to 
eliminate predatory lending practices that target service 
members and their families.
    The committee acknowledges the Department's efforts as 
outlined in the April 2014 Department of Defense Report, 
Enhancement of Protections on Consumer Credit for Members of 
the Armed Forces and their Dependents, which was requested in 
the conference report (H. Rept. 112-705) accompanying the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013. 
However, the committee is concerned with the current rule-
making the Department is undertaking under the MLA. Therefore, 
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a 
report by March 1, 2016, to the Committees on Armed Services of 
the Senate and the House of Representatives, concerning any 
rule-making with regard to the MLA, section 987 of title 10, 
United States Code, and the implementing regulation, part 232 
of title 32, Code of Federal Regulations. The report shall 
include:
    (1) A summary of the comments and an analysis of the 
disposition of the comments submitted to the Federal Register 
concerning part 232 of title 32, Code of Federal Regulations, 
during the rule-making comment period for the document entitled 
``Limitations on Terms of Consumer Credit Extended to Service 
Members and Dependents; Proposed Rule.''
    (2) The impact to military readiness, if any, objectively 
outlining the impact that has resulted from service member 
access to or use of various financial products including payday 
loans, vehicle title loans, bank deposit advances, pawn shop, 
and/or installment loans since the implementation of the MLA.
    (3) The adequacy of current staffing levels of the Defense 
Manpower Data Center, future projections for increased staffing 
levels, current and future funding requirements, and what steps 
are being taken to ensure data security to maintain and 
increase the accuracy, reliability and integrity of the 
Center's database systems.
    Additionally, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense not to implement any final rule-making related to the 
MLA, or its implementing regulation, and no final rule may take 
effect until 60 days after the date on which the report is 
transmitted to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate 
and the House of Representatives.

  Support Ongoing Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps Programs and 
                    Encourage Existing Participation

    The committee finds that the Junior Reserve Officer 
Training Corps (JROTC) program in high schools has a 
significant and important benefit to the readiness and 
recruitment efforts of the United States Armed Forces. The 
committee encourages the military services to maximize the 
number of JROTC opportunities available in high schools; or, if 
a JROTC program is not feasible, the opportunity for a National 
Defense Cadet Corps program.

                   The Reverent Treatment of Remains

    The committee encourages the Department of Defense to 
continue its policy of treating any remains of missing American 
service members discovered during the excavation or 
construction of infrastructure, in particular on the island of 
Saipan, with the proper reverence and respect by immediately 
coordinating with the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency to 
properly secure and identify the remains.

         Timely Access to Child Care on Military Installations

    The committee is aware of the challenges some military 
families face in accessing child care services on military 
installations. The committee understands that the Military 
Compensation and Retirement Modernization Commission has 
recommended several initiatives to improve child care services 
available to military families. The committee encourages the 
Department of Defense to consider the recommendations and 
implement those recommendations that will improve timely access 
to child care services. In addition, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to develop a plan to reduce the backlog of 
children waiting to receive child care services on military 
installations by 50 percent by October 1, 2017. Further, the 
committee directs the Secretary to brief the House Committee on 
Armed Services on the plan by March 31, 2016.

             Tracking for Non-Disability Mental Conditions

    The committee is encouraged by the progress the Department 
of Defense has made in accounting for non-disability mental 
conditions but is still concerned that these conditions are not 
properly documented as a service member transitions from 
service. The committee believes that the Department of Defense 
needs to improve the identification of service members 
separated for non-disability mental conditions, and to provide 
reasonable assurance that service members, including Reserve 
Component members, separated for non-disability mental 
conditions are separated appropriately and in accordance with 
standard Department of Defense procedures and documentation 
requirements. Therefore, the committee directs that the 
Secretary of Defense shall:
    (1) Develop methods to uniformly track separations due to 
non-disability mental conditions in an easily retrievable 
manner and conduct a comprehensive review of separation program 
designator codes, as well as any information shown on the 
Department of Defense Form 214.
    (2) Take steps to ensure there is an appropriately staffed 
process to identify administratively separated enlisted 
National Guard members who are unable to function effectively 
in the National Guard because of a non-disability mental 
condition.
    (3) Direct the military services to update their 
administrative separation policies to be consistent with 
Department of Defense regulations for those service members 
separated for all non-disability mental conditions.
    (4) Ensure the military services implement processes to 
oversee separations for non-disability mental conditions, such 
as reinstituting the requirement of annual compliance reporting 
of a sample of administrative separations, using current 
Department of Defense policy requirements as review criteria 
for service members of all military services and their Reserve 
Components.
    (5) Ensure that the military services planned oversight of 
separations for non-disability mental conditions is implemented 
and incorporates Reserve and National Guard members separated 
for such conditions, or that the services implement other 
processes to oversee such administrative separations using 
current Department of Defense policy requirements as review 
criteria for all service members, including Reserve and 
National Guard members.
    (6) Direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and 
Readiness to review any processes used by the military services 
to oversee such administrative separations to ensure compliance 
with Department of Defense policy requirements.

            Transfer of Post-9/11 GI Bill Education Benefits

    The committee is aware that the Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits 
under certain conditions can be transferred by an eligible 
service member to a spouse or children. The committee 
understands that such transfer can be made after a service 
member serves 6 years and commits to an additional 4 years of 
service. The committee is concerned that, for a variety of 
reasons, a service member who has elected to transfer all or 
part of their education benefit may retire or leave the service 
before serving the additional 4 years as required. In such 
cases, the service member is no longer eligible to transfer the 
benefit and may be subject to recoupment of funds leading to a 
hardship for the service member and their family. Therefore, 
the committee directs the Secretaries of the military 
departments to provide information to service members during 
pre-separation and pre-retirement counseling, as well as during 
the Transition Assistance Program to ensure service members who 
transfer GI Bill benefits to dependents, and then transition 
from the military without completion of the required service, 
receive information on the effect of the separation on their 
transfer benefit.

U.S. Special Operations Command Preservation of the Force and Families 
                                Program

    The budget request includes $55.9 million from Operations 
and Maintenance, Defense-Wide, for the U.S. Special Operations 
Command Preservation of the Force and Families (POTFF) program. 
The committee is pleased with the holistic balance of programs 
and activities across all elements of the POTFF program, 
including Human Performance, Social Performance, Spiritual 
Performance, and Psychological Performance programs. The 
committee remains very supportive of, and notes the renewed 
emphasis on, suicide prevention efforts for Special Operations 
Forces, and notes increased funding within the budget request 
for the Psychological Performance program of POTFF. The 
committee understands that the increase in requested amounts of 
funding for this important element of POTFF will continue 
resourcing for the operational embedded behavioral health care 
providers, and support specialized suicide prevention training, 
screening, and assessments. The committee is supportive of 
these programs and activities and urges continued coordination 
with the Defense Health Program to ensure continued and 
holistic care for U.S. Special Operations Forces and their 
families.
    The committee notes that sections 582 and 586 of the Carl 
Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) 
directed reviews and assessments of suicide prevention efforts 
across U.S. Special Operations Command and Special Operations 
Forces. The committee looks forward to examining the outcomes 
of those reports and continuing to work with the Department of 
Defense on implementing forthcoming recommendations. Elsewhere 
in this report, the committee also provides a 2-year extension 
of authority for U.S. Special Operations Command to continue 
pilot family support programs for immediate family members of 
members of the Armed Forces assigned to Special Operations 
Forces, as originally provided in section 554 of the the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public 
Law 113-66), until 2018. The committee encourages continued 
coordination of these pilot programs that should be integrated 
into the larger Preservation of the Force and Families program 
and activities.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Commander, U.S. 
Special Operations Command and the Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict to 
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not 
later than July 30, 2015, on the status of the Preservation of 
the Force and Families program, to include additional 
authorities and the coordination with the Defense Health 
Program.

 United States Government Accountability Office Study on Gambling and 
                  Problem Gambling in the Armed Forces

    The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense 
does not currently have treatment programs for members with 
problem gambling behaviors, while it does operate treatment 
programs for alcohol abuse, illegal substance abuse, and 
tobacco addiction. The committee is aware that The Diagnostic 
and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth Edition, 
published in May 2013) includes gambling addiction as a 
behavioral addiction, which reflects research finding that 
gambling disorders are similar to substance-related disorders 
in clinical expression, brain origin, comorbidity, physiology, 
and treatment. Individuals with problem gambling behavior have 
higher incidences of bankruptcy, domestic abuse, and suicide. 
Moreover, people who engage in problem gambling have high rates 
of co-occurring substance abuse and mental health disorders.
    The committee believes that an assessment of gambling 
problems and factors related to the development of such 
problems (including co-occurring disorders such as substance 
use, post-traumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injury, 
stress, and sensation seeking), and the social, health, and 
financial impacts of gambling on members is needed by 
incorporating questions on problem gambling behavior into 
ongoing research efforts as appropriate, including restoring 
them into the Health Related Behaviors Survey of Active Duty 
Military Personnel.
    Therefore, the committee directs the United States 
Government Accountability Office, not later than March 1, 2016, 
conduct and submit a study to the Senate Committee on Armed 
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services, on the 
number, type, and location of gambling installations (including 
bingo) operated by each military department, the total amount 
of cash flow through the gambling installations, the amount of 
revenue generated, and how the revenue is spent. The study 
shall include an assessment of the prevalence of problem 
gambling in the Armed Forces, including recommendations for 
military policy and programs to address such prevalence.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                  Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy


 Section 501--Equitable Treatment of Junior Officers Excluded from an 
   All-Fully-Qualified-Officers List Because of Administrative Error

    This section would amend section 624(a)(3) of title 10, 
United States Code, to specify that if the Secretary of a 
military department determines that one or more officers or 
former officers were not placed on an all-fully-qualified-list 
for promotion under this section because of administrative 
error, the Secretary may prepare a supplemental all-fully-
qualified-officers list for promotion containing the names of 
any such officers for approval in accordance with this section.

 Section 502--Authority to Defer Until Age 68 Mandatory Retirement for 
 Age of a General or Flag Officer Serving as Chief or Deputy Chief of 
               Chaplains of the Army, Navy, or Air Force

    This section would allow the Secretaries of the military 
departments to defer, until age 68, the mandatory retirement 
age of general and flag officer chaplains of the Army, Navy, or 
Air Force appointed as Chief or Deputy Chief of Chaplains. The 
authority would expire in 2020 in order to encourage the 
military departments to develop a plan, within the personnel 
management of their chaplains, to eliminate the need for 
continuing age waivers.

 Section 503--Implementation of Comptroller General Recommendation on 
 the Definition and Availability of Costs Associated with General and 
                     Flag Officers and their Aides

    This section would implement the Comptroller General's 
recommendation on the definition and availability of general 
and flag officer costs and require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a report by June 30, 2016 to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
describing such costs.

                Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management


  Section 511--Clarification of Purpose of Reserve Component Special 
   Selection Boards as Limited to Correction of Error at a Mandatory 
                            Promotion Board

    This section would amend section 14502(b) of title 10, 
United States Code, concerning Reserve Component special 
selection boards and whether an officer or former officer could 
request a special selection board based on having not been 
selected by a previous special selection board vice being 
considered by a mandatory promotion board convened under 
section 14101(a) of title 10, United States Code. This section 
would better align the statutory language regarding Active Duty 
and Reserve Component special selection boards.

Section 512--Ready Reserve Continuous Screening Regarding Key Positions 
  Disqualifying Federal Officials from Continued Service in the Ready 
                                Reserve

    This section would amend section 10149 of title 10, United 
States Code, to include members who occupy key Federal 
positions to the individuals who must be screened for continued 
service in the Ready Reserve.

   Section 513--Exemption of Military Technicians (Dual Status) from 
                      Civilian Employee Furloughs

    This section would amend section 10216(b)(3) of title 10, 
United States Code, and exempt military technicians (dual-
status) from civilian employee furloughs.

   Section 514--Annual Report on Personnel, Training, and Equipment 
Requirements for the Non-Federalized National Guard to Support Civilian 
Authorities in the Prevention and Response to Non-Catastrophic Domestic 
                               Disasters

    This section would amend section 10504 of title 10, United 
States Code, to require the Chief of the National Guard Bureau 
to submit to the congressional defense committees and a list of 
other officials by January 31 of each calendar year from 2016 
through 2022, an annual report on the personnel, training, and 
equipment requirements for the non-Federalized National Guard 
to support civilian authorities in the prevention and response 
to non-catastrophic domestic disasters.

 Section 515--National Guard Civil and Defense Support Activities and 
                            Related Matters

    This section would amend chapter 1 of title 32, United 
States Code, to codify the Modular Airborne Fire Fighting 
System mission under this title.

 Subtitle C--Consolidation of Authorities to Order Members of Reserve 
                       Components to Perform Duty


              Section 521--Administration of Reserve Duty

    This section would amend chapter 1209 of title 10, United 
States Code, by consolidating the number of Reserve Component 
status category authorities under which Reserve Component 
members may be called to duty from 30 to 6 and would direct the 
Secretaries concerned to develop policies and procedures to 
carry out these changes.

                 Section 522--Reserve Duty Authorities

    This section would amend chapter 1209 of title 10, United 
States Code, to authorize the President and the Secretary of 
Defense to call a member of the Reserve Component, under their 
jurisdiction, to Active or Inactive duty and provide 
authorities on activation timeline limitations and compensation 
requirements.

                  Section 523--Purpose of Reserve Duty

    This section would amend chapter 1209 of title 10, United 
States Code, to authorize the mobilization and limitations to 
mobilization as well as the call-up to Active Duty or Inactive 
duty of the Ready Reserve, Selected Reserve and certain members 
of the Individual Ready Reserve and would describe the purpose 
and limitations of such duty. This section would also authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to organize and administer the Reserve 
Components and would describe the authorities and limitations 
of such authorizations.

   Section 524--Training and Other Duty Performed by Members of the 
                             National Guard

    This section would authorize the required training, field 
exercises and other duty performed by members of the National 
Guard and would additionally authorize the purpose, 
restrictions, and limitations of a call to order of the 
National Guard.

            Section 525--Conforming and Clerical Amendments

    This section would authorize clerical and conforming 
amendments to the appropriate titles of the United States Code 
related to amendments made by this subtitle.

             Section 526--Effective Date and Implementation

    This section would establish the implementation date of the 
amendments made by this subtitle as October 1, 2017, and would 
require the Secretaries concerned to submit to the Committees 
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives by March 1, 2016, a report containing a plan, 
including a draft of legislation that may be necessary, to 
implement the amendments made by this subtitle.

                Subtitle D--General Service Authorities


  Section 531--Temporary Authority to Develop and Provide Additional 
                         Recruitment Incentives

    This section would provide temporary authority for the 
Secretary of a military department to develop a program and 
provide not more than three recruitment incentives, not 
otherwise authorized by law, to encourage individuals to accept 
an appointment as a commissioned or warrant officer or to 
enlist in an Armed Force under the jurisdiction of the 
Secretary. The Secretary concerned may not provide a 
recruitment incentive until the Secretary submits a plan to the 
congressional defense committees regarding the recruitment 
incentive, and the congressional 30-day notice and wait 
requirement is expired. The incentives may not be provided for 
longer than a 3-year period, unless the Secretary concerned 
requires additional time to evaluate the use of the incentive, 
and the Secretary concerned shall submit to the congressional 
defense committees a report describing and assessing the impact 
of the incentive. The authority provided by this section would 
expire on December 31, 2020.

Section 532--Expansion of Authority to Conduct Pilot Programs on Career 
    Flexibility to Enhance Retention of Members of the Armed Forces

    This section would extend and enhance the authority to 
conduct programs authorized under section 533 of the Duncan 
Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 
(Public Law 110-417), informed by lessons learned to date from 
Navy and Air Force implementation of the Career Intermission 
Pilot Program. Section 533 authorizes the Secretaries of the 
military departments to inactivate certain service members from 
active duty in order to meet personal or professional needs and 
be returned to active duty at the end of such period of 
inactivation from active duty. Extension and enhancement of 
this authority would afford the Secretaries of the military 
departments greater flexibility to test and evaluate 
alternative career retention options in specialties and skills 
in which monetary incentives alone have not produced required 
long-term retention results.

Section 533--Modification of Notice and Wait Requirements for Change in 
 Ground Combat Exclusion Policy for Female Members of the Armed Forces

    This section would amend the waiting period in section 652 
of title 10, United States Code, regarding a change to the 
ground combat exclusion policy.

  Section 534--Role of Secretary of Defense in Development of Gender-
                     Neutral Occupational Standards

    This section would amend section 524 of the Carl Levin and 
Howard ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2015 (Public-Law 113-291) to add combat readiness 
to the criteria for gender-neutral occupational standards.

Section 535--Burdens of Proof Applicable to Investigations and Reviews 
Related to Protected Communications of Members of the Armed Forces and 
                     Prohibited Retaliatory Actions

    This section would include the use of burdens proof 
specified under title 5 in investigations conducted by an 
Inspector General, reviews performed by a board of correction 
of military records, and reviews conducted by the Secretary of 
Defense related to protected communications of members of the 
Armed Forces.

  Section 536--Revision of Name on Military Service Record to Reflect 
    Change in Gender Identity After Separation from the Armed Forces

    This section would allow veterans to change their name on a 
certificate of discharge or an order of acceptance of 
resignation in order to reflect change in gender identity and a 
different name.

 Section 537--Establishment of Breastfeeding Policy for the Department 
                              of the Army

    This section would require the Secretary of the Army to 
establish a breastfeeding policy for female members of the 
Army.

Section 538--Sense of the House of Representatives Regarding Secretary 
   of Defense Review of Section 504 of Title 10, United States Code, 
         Regarding Enlisting Certain Aliens in the Armed Forces

    This section would express the sense of the House of 
Representatives that the Secretary of Defense should review 
section 504 of title 10, United States Code, to determine 
whether individuals with Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals 
may enlist in the Armed Forces.

  Subtitle E--Military Justice, Including Sexual Assault and Domestic 
                    Violence Prevention and Response


     Section 541--Improvements to Special Victims' Counsel Program

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
develop a policy to standardize the training and the timeframe 
of the training for Special Victims' Counsel, establish 
performance measures and standards for the Special Victims' 
Counsel programs, and direct the Secretary of each military 
department to require an individual selected to be a Special 
Victims' Counsel have adequate criminal justice experience and 
to ensure that Special Victims' Counsel are assigned to 
locations that maximize the opportunity for face-to-face 
interactions between counsel and clients.

Section 542--Department of Defense Civilian Employee Access to Special 
                            Victims' Counsel

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense or 
the Secretary of a military department to provide Special 
Victims' Counsel services to a civilian employee of the 
Department of Defense who is the victim of an alleged sex-
related offense.

 Section 543--Access to Special Victims' Counsel for Former Dependents 
           of Members and Former Members of the Armed Forces

    This section would modify section 1044e(a)(2) of title 10, 
United States Code, to include, under certain circumstances, 
former dependents of a service member or former service members 
among those eligible for access to special victims' counsel.

   Section 544--Representation and Assistance from Special Victims' 
                   Counsel in Retaliatory Proceedings

    This section would allow victims of alleged sex-related 
offenses to receive representation and assistance from special 
victims' counsel in any retaliatory proceedings related to the 
victim's report of the offense.

Section 545--Timely Notification to Victims of Sex-related Offenses of 
      the Availability of Assistance from Special Victims' Counsel

    This section would require notification to a victim of a 
sex-related offense of the availability of Special Victims' 
Counsel prior to interviewing or requesting a statement from 
the victim.

Section 546--Participation by Victim in Punitive Proceedings and Access 
                               to Records

    This section would allow a victim to submit written matters 
for consideration by a commanding officer prior to imposing 
punishment, mitigating punishment, or considering an appeal 
under nonjudicial punishment proceedings. This section would 
also allow the victim to submit written matters for 
consideration related to a separation proceeding, and requires 
the separation authority to consider impact on the victim prior 
to making a decision.

Section 547--Victim Access to Report of Results of Preliminary Hearing 
        under Article 32 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice

    This section would require the victim of an offense to 
receive a copy of the Article 32 report at the same time the 
report is delivered to the accused.

  Section 548--Minimum Confinement Period Required for Conviction of 
 Certain Sex-Related Offenses Committed by Members of the Armed Forces

    This section would modify the mandatory minimum sentence 
for certain sex-related offenses to require a minimum of 2-
years confinement.

  Section 549--Strategy to Prevent Retaliation Against Members of the 
    Armed Forces Who Report or Intervene on Behalf of the Victim in 
                      Instances of Sexual Assault

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
establish a comprehensive strategy to prevent retaliation 
against members who report or intervene on behalf of the victim 
in instances of sexual assault. The strategy would include 
bystander intervention programs, policies and requirements to 
ensure protection from retaliation, and training for commanders 
on methods and procedures to combat attitudes and beliefs that 
lead to retaliation. The Secretary would be required to brief 
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives 90 days after the date of the enactment of this 
Act on the comprehensive strategy.

Section 550--Improved Department of Defense Prevention and Response to 
   Sexual Assaults in which the Victim is a Male Member of the Armed 
                                 Forces

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense, in 
collaboration with the Secretaries of the military departments, 
to develop a plan to improve sexual assault prevention and 
response when the victim is a male member of the Armed Forces. 
The plan would include training to address the incidence of 
sexual assault of male service members, an evaluation of the 
medical and mental health needs of male victims as compared to 
female victims, goals and metrics to address sexual assault of 
male service members, information about male victimization in 
communications to raise awareness of sexual assault, and 
guidance to medical and mental health providers for care of 
male service members who are victims of sexual assault.

   Section 551--Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Training for 
    Administrators and Instructors of the Junior and Senior Reserve 
                        Officers' Training Corps

    This section would require the Secretary of a military 
department to ensure that commanders of Junior and Senior 
Reserve Officers' Training Corps units and other individuals of 
the Reserve Officers' Training Corps receive regular sexual 
assault prevention and response training and education, as well 
as information regarding the availability of legal assistance 
and the sexual assault prevention and response program.

   Section 552--Modification of Manual for Courts-Martial to Require 
           Consistent Preparation of the Full Record of Trial

    This section would modify the Manual for Courts-Martial 
Rule 1103 to require a complete record of trial in any general 
or special court-martial proceeding.

  Section 553--Inclusion of Additional Information in Annual Reports 
 Regarding Department of Defense Sexual Assault Prevention and Response

    This section would require the Department of Defense to 
include additional data in its annual sexual assault prevention 
and response report, including reporting cases under the Family 
Advocacy Program, adding data related to sexual harassment, and 
additional retaliation data.

 Section 554--Retention of Case Notes in Investigations of Sex-Related 
  Offenses Involving Members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine 
                                 Corps

    This section would require the Department of Defense to 
retain all elements of the case file in investigations of sex-
related offenses for no less than 50 years.

  Section 555--Additional Guidance Regarding Release of Mental Health 
Records of Department of Defense Medical Treatment Facilities in Cases 
                   Involving any Sex-related Offense

    This section would prohibit Department of Defense treatment 
facilities from releasing mental health records of alleged 
victims of sex-related offenses without an order from a 
military judge or Article 32 officer.

  Section 556--Public Availability of Records of Certain Proceedings 
               under the Uniform Code of Military Justice

    This section would require the Department of Defense to 
make records of court-martial proceedings available through a 
public website.

     Section 557--Revision of Department of Defense Directive-Type 
Memorandum 15-003, Relating to Registered Sex Offender Identification, 
       Notification, and Monitoring in the Department of Defense

    This section would require the Department of Defense to 
create a database to track sex offenders.

  Section 558--Improved Implementation of Changes to Uniform Code of 
                            Military Justice

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
examine the Uniform Code of Military Justice review process to 
develop options for streamlining this process.

         Subtitle F--Member Education, Training, and Transition


 Section 561--Availability of Preseparation Counseling for Members of 
   the Armed Forces Discharged or Released After Limited Active Duty

    This section would exclude any day on which a member 
performed full-time training or annual training duty and 
attendance at a school designated as a service school from the 
calculation of continuous days of Active Duty for the purpose 
of preseparation counseling.

 Section 562--Availability of Additional Training Opportunities under 
                     Transition Assistance Program

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense and the 
Secretary of Homeland Security to permit a member of the Armed 
Forces eligible for the Transition Assistance Program to 
receive additional training in preparation for higher education 
or training, career or technical training, or entrepreneurship.

    Section 563--Enhancements to Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program

    This section would amend section 582 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
181) to expand eligibility for the program; add quality of life 
to the services for which the Secretary of Defense may enter 
into partnerships to provide services and grants under the 
program; provide flexibility in the number and timing of 
information, events, and activities provided under the program; 
and require the Office for Reintegration Programs to assist in 
the collection and analysis of best practices regarding suicide 
prevention.

     Section 564--Appointments to Military Service Academies from 
  Nominations Made by Delegates in Congress from the Virgin Islands, 
  Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 
                                Islands

    This section would amend sections 4342(a), 6954(a), and 
9342(a) of title 10, United States Code, to add one additional 
nomination for appointment to each military service academy by 
a delegate from the territory of Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. 
Virgin Islands, or the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 
Islands.

 Section 565--Recognition of Additional Involuntary Mobilization Duty 
   Authorities Exempt from Five-Year Limit on Reemployment Rights of 
              Persons who Serve in the Uniformed Services

    This section would exempt two additional involuntary 
mobilization duty authorities from the 5-year limit on 
reemployment rights under the Uniformed Services Employment and 
Reemployment Rights Act: (1) orders of the Army, Navy, Marine 
Corps, and Air Force Reserve to active duty to provide 
assistance in response to a major disaster or emergency; and 
(2) orders of the Selected Reserve to active duty for 
preplanned missions in support of the combatant commands.

    Section 566--Job Training and Post-Service Placement Executive 
                               Committee

    This section would establish a Job Training and Post-
Service Placement Executive Committee within the Department of 
Veterans Affairs-Department of Defense Joint Executive 
Committee established pursuant to section 320 of title 38, 
United States Code.

    Section 567--Direct Employment Pilot Program for Members of the 
                       National Guard and Reserve

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
carry out a pilot program to provide job placement assistance 
and related employment services directly to members of the 
National Guard and Reserves.

   Section 568--Program Regarding Civilian Credentialing for Skills 
         Required for Certain Military Occupational Specialties

    This section would add six military occupational 
specialties to the pilot program established under section 558 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 
(Public Law 112-81) to assess the feasibility and advisability 
of permitting enlisted members of the Armed Forces to obtain 
civilian credentialing or licensing for skills required for 
military occupational specialties or qualification for duty 
specialty codes.

Subtitle G--Defense Dependents' Education and Military Family Readiness 
                                Matters


  Section 571--Continuation of Authority to Assist Local Educational 
  Agencies That Benefit Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and 
                Department of Defense Civilian Employees

    This section would authorize $30.0 million for the 
continuation of the Department of Defense assistance in fiscal 
year 2016 to local educational agencies that are impacted by 
the enrollment of dependent children of military members and 
Department of Defense civilian employees.

Section 572--Extension of Authority to Conduct Family Support Programs 
for Immediate Family Members of Members of the Armed Forces Assigned to 
                       Special Operations Forces

    This section would extend the family support program 
authority provided for immediate family members of members of 
the Armed Forces assigned to Special Operations Forces in 
section 554 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66) by 2 years, from 2016 to 
2018.

 Section 573--Support for Efforts to Improve Academic Achievement and 
               Transition of Military Dependent Students

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
make grants to non-profit organizations that provide services 
improve academic achievement of military dependent students.

   Section 574--Study Regarding Feasibility of Using DEERS to Track 
  Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense 
 Civilian Employees Who are Elementary or Secondary Education Students

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
report to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees a 
report on a study regarding the feasibility of using the 
Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System to track 
dependents of members of the Armed Forces and Department of 
Defense civilian employees who are elementary or secondary 
education students.

  Section 575--Sense of Congress Regarding Support for Dependents of 
        Members of the Armed Forces Attending Specialized Camps

    This section would express the sense of Congress that the 
Department of Defense should support dependents of members of 
the Armed Forces in attending specialized camps to support 
children.

                   Subtitle H--Decorations and Awards


Section 581--Authorization for Award of the Distinguished-Service Cross 
        for Acts of Extraordinary Heroism During the Korean War

    This section would waive the statutory time limitation 
under section 3744 of title 10, United States Code, to 
authorize the Secretary of the Army to award the Distinguished-
Service Cross to Edward G. Halcomb, who served in the United 
States Army during the Korean War. The committee takes this 
action based on the written confirmation by the Secretary of 
the Army that the actions of Edward G. Halcomb merit the award 
of the Distinguished-Service Cross.

  Section 582--Limitation on Authority of Secretaries of the Military 
        Departments Regarding Revocation of Combat Valor Awards

    This section would remove the ability of the Secretaries of 
military departments to revoke a service member's award unless 
the conduct of the service member during the time of the 
distinguished act was not honorable.

 Section 583--Award of Purple Heart to Members of the Armed Forces who 
          were Victims of the Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, Bombing

    This section would extend the criteria of awarding the 
Purple Heart to include the six Active Duty service members who 
were killed during the April 19, 1995, bombing of the Murrah 
Federal Building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

                 Subtitle I--Reports and Other Matters


    Section 591--Authority for United States Air Force Institute of 
  Technology to Charge and Retain Tuition for Instruction of Persons 
    Other Than Air Force Personnel Detailed for Instruction at the 
                               Institute

    This section would amend section 9314a of title 10, United 
States Code, relating to enrollment at the Air Force Institute 
of Technology of persons other than Air Force personnel, 
including the authority to charge and retain tuition for such 
persons. It would extend the reimbursement and tuition 
provisions to a new category of students: non-detailed persons, 
including non-detailed members, non-detailed civilians, and 
Federal scholarship recipients. This section would also make 
organizational and conforming changes to section 9314 of title 
10, United States Code.

  Section 592--Honoring Certain Members of the Reserve Components as 
                                Veterans

    This section would create a new section 107A of title 38, 
United States Code, to recognize the service, in the Reserve 
Components, of certain service members by honoring them with 
status as veterans. This section would honor as a veteran any 
person who is entitled under chapter 1223 of title 10, United 
States Code, to retired pay for nonregular service or who, but 
for age, would be entitled under such chapter to retired pay 
for nonregular service, but would not create an entitlement to 
any benefit by reason of this section.

    Section 593--Support for Designation of 2015 as the Year of the 
                             Military Diver

    This section would express the sense of Congress that 
reaffirms support for sacrifices made by military divers, 
recognizes the sacrifices of those who have volunteered as 
military divers, and encourages the Department of Defense to 
designate 2015 as the Year of the Military Diver.

         Section 594--Transfer and Adoption of Military Animals

    This section would amend section 2583 of title 10, United 
States Code, regarding the adoption of military animals. 
Specifically, this section would alter the priority order of 
authorized recipients of adopted military animals and would 
require the Secretary of the military department concerned to 
make animals available for adoption under certain 
circumstances.

   Section 595--Coordination with Non-Government Suicide Prevention 
       Organizations and Agencies to Assist in Reducing Suicides

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
develop a policy to coordinate the efforts of the Department of 
Defense and non-governmental suicide prevention organizations. 
This section would also require such policy to be submitted to 
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of 
Representatives not later than 180 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.

          TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS

                                OVERVIEW

    The committee continues to believe that robust and flexible 
compensation programs are central to maintaining a high-
quality, all-volunteer, combat-ready force. Accordingly, the 
committee supports a 2.3 percent military pay raise for fiscal 
year 2016, in accordance with current law, in order for 
military pay raises to keep pace with the pay increases in the 
private sector, as measured by the Employment Cost Index.
    The committee is once again concerned with the raft of 
compensation and benefit changes proposed in the President's 
request, including the reduced pay raise and the reduced basic 
allowance for housing and the effects of the totality of such 
proposals on service members and their families, particularly 
junior enlisted personnel. The committee recognizes that the 
fiscal environment is challenging and the Department of Defense 
continues to face greater pressure each year under 
sequestration-level budget caps but believes that proper 
compensation levels must be maintained to preserve the current 
high-quality, All-Volunteer Force.
    As the committee continues to assess the impact of the 
recommendations of the Military Compensation and Retirement 
Modernization Commission will have on the All-Volunteer Force, 
it believes that there are recommendations that are important 
to adopt. The committee includes a retirement modernization 
provision that would allow for changes to the current 20-year, 
cliff-vested retirement system to allow for a more flexible 
blended system that adds a defined contribution, Government 
matching Thrift Savings Plan, to the current defined benefit. 
Additionally, the provision would provide for a separate mid-
career continuation pay to further enhance retention of service 
members. To help service members make the important financial 
decisions inherent in the modernized retirement system, the 
committee includes a provision that would provide for improved, 
robust, financial literacy preparedness training programs that 
will enhance service members overall financial readiness. 
Additionally, in order to help sustain the current All-
Volunteer Force, the committee continues to support authorities 
for a wide array of bonuses, special and incentive pays, and 
other compensation benefits for an additional year.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


          Military Allotment Prohibition Briefing to Congress

    The committee understands that an amendment to the 
Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation, 
effective January 1, 2015, now prohibits Active Duty service 
members from establishing new allotments for certain purposes, 
such as the purchase, lease, or rental of personal property. 
The committee is concerned with the method by which the 
decision to prohibit certain allotments by military members was 
reached. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed 
Services by January 1, 2016, on the process and justification 
associated with the amendment to the Department of Defense 
Financial Management Regulation. The briefing shall include, 
but not be limited to, the timing and format of the public 
notice and comment period prior to issuance of the amendment; a 
summary of public comments submitted for the record; a summary 
of hearings and workshops held; a list of stakeholders 
consulted and the timing, manner, and results of such 
consultation; a summary of all comments and views expressed by 
stakeholders and how those comments and views were addressed; 
the justification for the amendment with supporting 
documentation; an analysis, with case studies, of the nexus 
between predatory lending and the allotment system; and all 
studies, data, methodologies, analyses, and other information 
relied on by the Department.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                     Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances


 Section 601--Extension of Authority to Provide Temporary Increase in 
    Rates of Basic Allowance for Housing Under Certain Circumstances

    This section would extend for 1 year the authority of the 
Secretary of Defense to temporarily increase the rates of basic 
allowance for housing in areas impacted by natural disasters or 
experiencing a sudden influx of personnel.

Section 602--Prohibition on Per Diem Allowance Reductions Based on the 
        Duration of Temporary Duty Assignment or Civilian Travel

    This section would amend section 474(d)(3) of title 37, 
United States Code, to prohibit the Secretaries concerned from 
altering the amount of per diem allowance, or the maximum 
reimbursement for a locality for members of the uniformed 
services and civilian employees based on the duration of the 
temporary duty or travel.

           Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays


   Section 611--One-Year Extension of Certain Bonus and Special Pay 
                     Authorities for Reserve Forces

    This section would extend the authority, through December 
31, 2016, for the Selected Reserve reenlistment bonus, the 
Selected Reserve affiliation or enlistment bonus, special pay 
for enlisted members assigned to certain high-priority units, 
the Ready Reserve enlistment bonus for persons without prior 
service, the Ready Reserve enlistment and reenlistment bonus 
for persons with prior service, the Selected Reserve enlistment 
and reenlistment bonus for persons with prior service, income 
replacement payments for Reserve Component members experiencing 
extended and frequent mobilization for Active Duty service, and 
the authority to reimburse travel expenses for inactive duty 
training outside of normal commuting distance.

   Section 612--One-Year Extension of Certain Bonus and Special Pay 
               Authorities for Health Care Professionals

    This section would extend for 1 year the authority for the 
nurse officer candidate accession program, repayment of 
educational loans for certain health professionals who serve in 
the Selected Reserve, the accession and retention bonuses for 
psychologists, the accession bonus for registered nurses, the 
incentive special pay for nurse anesthetists, the special pay 
for Selected Reserve health care professionals in critically 
short wartime specialties, the accession bonus for dental 
officers, the accession bonus for pharmacy officers, the 
accession bonus for medical officers in critically short 
wartime specialties, and the accession bonus for dental 
specialist officers in critically short wartime specialties, 
until December 31, 2016.

 Section 613--One-Year Extension of Special Pay and Bonus Authorities 
                          for Nuclear Officers

    This section would extend the authority for the special pay 
for nuclear-qualified officers extending a period of active 
service, the nuclear career accession bonus, and the nuclear 
career annual incentive bonus until December 31, 2016.

  Section 614--One-Year Extension of Authorities Relating to Title 37 
     Consolidated Special Pay, Incentive Pay, and Bonus Authorities

    This section would extend the general bonus authority for 
enlisted members, the general bonus authority for officers, the 
special bonus and incentive pay authority for nuclear officers, 
special aviation incentive pay and bonus authorities, the 
special health professions incentive pay and bonus authorities, 
hazardous duty pay, assignment pay or special duty pay, skill 
incentive pay or proficiency bonus, contracting bonus for 
Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps cadets and midshipmen, 
and the retention bonus for members with critical military 
skills or assigned to high-priority units, until December 31, 
2016.

 Section 615--One-Year Extension of Authorities Relating to Payment of 
                Other Title 37 Bonuses and Special Pays

    This section would extend the authority for the aviation 
officer retention bonus, assignment incentive pay, the 
reenlistment bonus for active members, the enlistment bonus for 
active members, the incentive pay for members of 
precommissioning programs pursuing foreign language 
proficiency, the accession bonus for new officers in critical 
skills, the incentive bonus for conversion to military 
occupational specialty to ease personnel shortage, the 
incentive bonus for transfer between Armed Forces, and the 
accession bonus for officer candidates until December 31, 2016.

Section 616--Increase in Maximum Annual Amount of Nuclear Officer Bonus 
                                  Pay

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to 
increase, from $35,000 per year up to $50,000 per year, the 
maximum Nuclear Officer Bonus payable under section 333 of 
title 37, United States Code, if the Secretary of the Navy 
considers it necessary to address declining nuclear officer 
retention and growing retention uncertainty.

 Section 617--Modification to Special Aviation Incentive Pay and Bonus 
                        Authorities for Officers

    This section would assist the Department of Defense in 
meeting the congressionally mandated timeline to fully 
transition from the legacy pay authorities in subchapter I of 
chapter 5 of title 37, United States Code, to the consolidated 
pay authorities in subchapter II of chapter 5 of such title, 
and, in particular, the aviation pay authority provided in 
section 334 of such title. Specifically, this section would 
provide the authority for a Secretary of a military department 
to define in regulation, guidelines allowing the Secretary 
concerned to pay aviation incentive pay to an officer while the 
officer is not engaged in the performance of operational flying 
duty or proficiency flying duty, but serving in positions vital 
to the service. This section would also give the Secretaries of 
the military departments the ability to continue to provide 
aviation incentive pay to flight surgeons and other medical 
officers while assigned to operational flying duty. Finally, 
this section would increase the statutory limits for the 
aviation incentive pay and retention bonus and would allow the 
Department of Defense the flexibility to increase the aviation 
incentive pay limit set forth in regulations issued by the 
Secretary of Defense.

   Section 618--Repeal of Obsolete Special Travel and Transportation 
 Allowance for Survivors of Deceased Members of the Armed Forces from 
                          the Vietnam Conflict

    This section would amend section 481f of title 37, United 
States Code, to provide equal travel benefits to eligible 
family members regardless of location of death or connection to 
a specific conflict.

        Subtitle C--Modernization of Military Retirement System


 Section 631--Full Participation for Members of the Uniformed Services 
                         in Thrift Savings Plan

    This section would modernize the current military 
retirement system by blending the current defined benefit, 
cliff-vesting retirement plan with a defined contribution plan 
allowing service members to contribute to a portable Thrift 
Savings Plan account with a Government contribution matching 
program.

Section 632--Modernized Retirement System for Members of the Uniformed 
                                Services

    This section would modernize the current uniformed services 
retirement system by blending the current defined benefit, 
cliff-vesting retirement plan with a defined contribution plan, 
lump sum career continuation pay, and retention bonuses paid at 
defined career milestones, while continuing a 20 year defined 
annuity.

  Section 633--Continuation Pay for Full TSP Members with 12 Years of 
                                Service

    This section would modernize the current military 
retirement system by adding a mandatory lump sum career 
continuation pay at 12 years of service with an agreement by 
the service member to continue in service for 4 more years.

             Section 634--Effective Date and Implementation

    This section would require the Secretaries concerned to 
submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and 
the House of Representatives, the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce, the Committee on Natural Resources and the Committee 
on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
Representatives a report by March 1, 2016, containing a plan to 
ensure full and effective implementation of the sections of 
this subtitle. This section would also direct the date of 
implementation of the amendments made by this subtitle to be 
October 1, 2017.

    Subtitle D--Commissary and Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentality 
                        Benefits and Operations


   Section 641--Preserving Assured Commissary Supply to Asia and the 
                                Pacific

    This section would protect the commissary benefit by 
requiring a comprehensive review of the Asia-Pacific produce 
supply chain before any changes are made to regional second 
destination policy. This section would also require the 
submission of the review to Congress.

  Section 642--Prohibition on Replacement or Consolidation of Defense 
 Commissary and Exchange Systems Pending Submission of Required Report 
                      on Defense Commissary System

    This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from 
taking any action to replace or consolidate the defense 
commissary and exchange systems before the submission of the 
report on the defense commissary system required by section 634 
of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-
291).

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters


  Section 651--Improvement of Financial Literacy and Preparedness of 
                      Members of the Armed Forces

    This section would express the sense of the Congress 
regarding the need to improve financial literacy and 
preparedness of members of the Armed Forces. This section would 
also amend section 992 of title 10, United States Code, to 
require the Secretary of Defense and the military service 
chiefs to increase the frequency and strengthen the financial 
literacy and preparedness training of members of the Armed 
Forces. This section would detail the specific periods during a 
service member's career that this training shall be provided.

                   TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS

                                OVERVIEW

    The committee remains dedicated to ensuring that the 
military health system provides high-quality health care to its 
9.6 million beneficiaries, including service members, retirees, 
and their eligible family members. The committee believes that 
ensuring every wounded service member has access to the care 
and support they need during their recovery is paramount. The 
committee would take steps to continue close oversight of the 
programs that support recovering service members by requiring 
the Comptroller General of the United States to evaluate 
whether there are systemic mistreatment issues in the Army 
Warrior Transition Units, as well as the Army's plan to 
maintain the Warrior Transition Units capability with fewer 
soldiers and resources. The committee also seeks to ensure that 
the Military Health System is structured to hire and retain 
high-quality personnel to meet their critical capability needs 
and that the Department takes every opportunity to evaluate its 
current capability needs. Specifically, the committee 
encourages the Department to utilize the direct hire authority 
to fill critical health occupational shortages.
    In addition, the committee continues its focus on reforming 
the military health system to gain efficiencies through its 
medical command structure by increased sharing of resources, 
use of common operating processes, and reduction in duplicative 
functions and organizations. Specifically, the committee 
directs the Department to establish a unified medical command 
to provide the medical services to the Armed Forces and their 
beneficiaries, as well as medical readiness, through a joint 
structure.
    Lastly, the committee remains committed to ensuring that 
the collaboration between the Department of Defense and the 
Department of Veterans Affairs is strengthened to provide the 
best service to veterans. In that regard, the committee would 
require that the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of 
Veteran Affairs work together to establish a joint uniform 
formulary for pharmaceutical agents relating to psychiatric 
conditions, sleep disorders and pain management, as an 
individual transitions from one Department to the other.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                      Access to Mental Health Care

    The committee is aware that some Active Duty service 
members may be reluctant to seek mental health care from health 
care providers on military bases or by referral from a military 
provider to civilian mental health care due to perceived stigma 
associated with seeking mental health services. The committee 
is also aware that the Department of Defense Military OneSource 
program provides access to confidential mental health services 
for Active Duty service members upon request. However, the 
committee is concerned that many Active Duty service members 
may be unaware that confidential mental health services are 
available through Military OneSource. Therefore, the committee 
strongly encourages the Secretary of Defense to provide 
information on the confidential mental health services 
available through Military OneSource to each Active Duty 
service member.

               Alcohol Prevention and Monitoring Programs

    The committee believes that including new tools for the 
personal monitoring of breath alcohol levels would result in an 
increase in the effectiveness of current and future alcohol 
prevention programs. The committee strongly encourages the 
department to deploy these new tools for the personal 
monitoring of breath alcohol levels to ongoing alcohol safety 
and abuse prevention programs to measure and increase the 
program's effectiveness.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretaries of the 
military services, by June 30, 2016, to submit to the House 
Committee on Armed Services, a briefing on alcohol abuse 
prevention programs to include a cost benefit analysis 
detailing the most effective methods for preventing alcohol, 
and a means for continual monitoring of the effectiveness of 
these programs.

                      Compound Drug Prescriptions

    The committee understands that the Department of Defense 
has identified the recent escalating prices and claims for 
compound drug prescriptions as a concern. The committee is 
aware of the Department of Defense's efforts to control the 
cost of the compound drug prescriptions to the Department and 
protect the safety of the beneficiary. Therefore the committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense to brief the House Committee 
on Armed Services no later than October 1, 2015 on initiatives 
to decrease claims of high cost compound drug prescriptions and 
educate beneficiaries on the importance of working with their 
primary care provider to ensure they are receiving safe 
medications.

      Comptroller General Report on Army Warrior Transition Units

    The committee is concerned about allegations of 
mistreatment over the past year in some Army Warrior Transition 
Units (WTUs). The committee is also concerned about how the 
Army will maintain the robust capability it has created since 
2008 as the number of soldiers requiring the use of WTUs 
continues to decrease.
    Therefore, the committee directs 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 by 
March 1, 2016, evaluating whether there are systemic 
mistreatment issues in the Army WTUs, as well as the Army's 
plan to maintain the Warrior Transition Units capability with 
fewer soldiers and resources. The evaluation shall include but 
is not limited to:
    (1) The current system to respond to and address complaints 
by wounded warriors in Warrior Transition Units and whether the 
system is effective and fair;
    (2) The process for selecting commanders and cadre assigned 
to the Warrior Transition Units and how involved the Surgeon 
General of the Army and the installation commanders are in the 
process;
    (3) The effectiveness of the Triad of Care;
    (4) The Army's plan, if any, to consolidate WTUs based on 
the projected number of service members that could be assigned 
to the WTUs in the future; and
    (5) Any proposed changes to criteria for assigning a 
wounded warrior to a WTU and whether the criteria is consistent 
between the Active Component and the Reserve Component.

           Dietary Guidelines for Military Nutrition Programs

    The committee supports efforts by the Secretary of Defense 
to implement nutritional standards based upon the best 
available and most scientifically sound nutrition evidence to 
enhance the physical and cognitive health and performance of 
military and civilian personnel, while maximizing their 
readiness and warfighting capabilities. As such, the committee 
is concerned about recommendations contained in the Scientific 
Report of the 2015 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee that 
focus on issues outside of nutritional health, such as those to 
incorporate sustainability, climate change, and other 
environmental factors and agricultural production practices 
into the criteria for establishing the final 2015 Dietary 
Guidelines for Americans (DGA). Therefore, should the Secretary 
of Defense utilize the DGA recommendations, the committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense to include in military 
nutrition programs only those DGA recommendations that fall 
within the scope of health and wellness.

 Direct Hire Authority for Critical Health Care Occupational Shortages

    The committee is concerned that the Secretary of Defense 
has not taken action to fully maximize military treatment 
facilities, particularly through the use of the direct hiring 
authority provided under section 1599c of title 10, United 
States Code. The authority provided to the Secretary allows 
great flexibility in order to access and maintain necessary 
medical skills within the military health care system. The 
committee understands that the Department of Defense has yet to 
implement the authority provided, which has had an adverse 
impact on the services' ability to recruit civilian health care 
professionals. Civilian medical professionals, like other 
Department of Defense civilians, have experienced several years 
of pay freezes as well as a furlough, which has resulted in 
numbers of health care professionals leaving the military 
health care system. The Army alone saw thousands of health care 
professionals leave during this time and seek employment with 
other Federal agencies that were not affected by the furlough. 
Yet the direct hiring authority available to the Secretary has 
not been utilized to help the services appropriately staff 
their facilities.
    Maximizing care at military treatment facilities reduces 
cost to the military health care system and, ultimately, to the 
Department's budget. The committee urges the Secretary to work 
with the Secretaries of the military departments to ensure that 
the authorities provided under section 1599c of title 10, 
United States Code, are effective in meeting the health care 
hiring requirements of the services. The committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to brief the House Committee on Armed 
Services by September 1, 2015, on how the Department plans to 
implement the authorities under section 1599c of title 10, 
United States Code, in order to support the services' efforts 
to recruit and hire critical health care professionals.

                           Medical Readiness

    The committee recognizes that sustaining military medical 
readiness during peacetime has long been a challenge. As noted 
in the Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization 
Commission Final Report, beneficiary care alone may not provide 
the volume and case mix necessary to ``maintain and sustain the 
military medical capabilities developed during the last 13 
years of war.'' Thus, with the war winding down and fewer 
troops being deployed, the committee directs the Secretaries of 
the military services to brief the House Committee on Armed 
Services by June 30, 2016, on the current status of medical 
readiness and trauma capabilities.

          Meeting the Needs of Female Service Member Amputees

    The committee is encouraged by the quality of care the 
Department of Defense is providing to service member amputees. 
However, as the committee has noted in the past, female service 
members have unique physical attributes that often require 
tailored approaches to meet female-specific equipment and 
health care needs. Moreover, the committee recognizes 
scientific literature that finds that women are less likely to 
be successfully fitted with a prosthetic limb at the time of 
their discharge from hospital than men. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a 
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services on the 
Department's current ability to meet the needs of female 
service members who require prosthetics. This brief should take 
into account the ability of the Department of Defense to 
provide female amputees with prostheses specifically designed 
to meet the needs of women. It should also include an 
assessment of whether the Department is able to meet the 
multidisciplinary amputee care needs of female service members 
including seeing an appropriate physician, prosthetist, and 
occupational or physical therapist.

                 Military Doctors of Podiatric Medicine

    The committee understands that the role of podiatrists in 
the military has evolved as the profession itself has grown in 
size and training. The committee is aware that because of this, 
the clinical role of the podiatric surgeon may not fit within 
the Medical Service Corps, and that being in the Medical 
Service Corps may limit career progression and opportunities 
for leadership positions for podiatrists within the military 
services. Further, it is the committee's understanding that 
deployments have offered limited opportunities for podiatrists 
to serve in leadership positions that would otherwise be 
restricted to members of the Medical Corps. To better 
understand the role and responsibilities of military 
podiatrists, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
brief the House Committee on Armed Services by July 1, 2016, on 
the utilization of podiatrists within the Military Health 
System.

                     Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder

    The committee continues to support Department of Defense 
efforts to identify and treat post-traumatic stress disorder 
(PTSD) occurring in members of the Armed Forces as a result of 
combat. Untreated PTSD can lead to long-term mental health 
issues and possibly suicide. The committee recognizes the 
importance of having a measurement system to evaluate current 
and future PTSD programs to help ensure the effectiveness of 
treatment and increase the likelihood of completion by the 
service member. The committee encourages the Department of 
Defense and the Veterans Administration to continue to work 
with research entities to ensure that proper measurement 
systems are used to evaluate PTSD treatment programs.
    In addition, the committee encourages the Department to 
institute programs that have demonstrated preliminary evidence 
of effectiveness in reducing symptoms of post-traumatic stress 
and the issues that occur due to readjustment to civilian life, 
such as programs that utilize paradigm shift, holistic 
approach, and experiential learning as part of the continuum of 
care. The committee also recognizes the utility of alternative 
cognitive behavioral therapy approaches to combat PTSD in 
service members.
    The committee recognizes the importance of continued 
research into the use and effectiveness of new variations of 
treatment options for PTSD. The committee encourages the 
Department of Defense to collaborate with State organizations 
and research entities to assess the utility of treatment 
programs being researched, including use of wearable sensors to 
help individuals undergoing behavioral therapy treatments and 
advances in proton therapy to pinpoint and alleviate pain which 
may exacerbate symptoms of PTSD. In addition, the committee 
encourages the Department to explore the use of novel cognitive 
therapies such as Attention Bias Modification training, 
magnetic resonance therapy, or sports therapy programs that 
could be used in conjunction with other therapies and 
medication for treatment of military personnel diagnosed with 
PTSD.

      Screening, Prevention and Treatment of Hepatitis A, B and C

    The committee notes that although the prevalence for 
infection of Hepatitis A, B, and C has significantly decreased, 
there are still service members at risk for contracting the 
viruses. The committee is also aware that improved screening, 
vaccination and treatment protocols are readily available to 
protect service members. Therefore, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to brief the Committee on Armed Services 
of the House of Representatives no later than January 1, 2016 
on its procedures and policies for screening, prevention and 
treatment of Hepatitis A, B, and C.

    Status and Impacts of Reductions in TRICARE Prime Service Areas

    In October 2013, more than a hundred thousand TRICARE Prime 
beneficiaries across the United States living outside 40 miles 
from a Military Treatment Facility lost access to TRICARE Prime 
due to the Department of Defense's change in Prime Service Area 
coverage. The committee notes that Section 701 of the Fiscal 
Year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act provided for a 
one-time election opportunity for individuals who elected to 
remain in TRICARE Prime, should the individual reside in an 
affected ZIP code and within 100 miles of a Military Treatment 
Facility. However, the committee understands that many 
beneficiaries live more than 100 miles from a Military 
Treatment Facility, and therefore were ineligible to 
participate in TRICARE Prime election.
    The committee believes that access to quality healthcare 
services is a benefit earned through prior service to our 
nation and that the Department of Defense should continue to 
provide top-level healthcare to beneficiaries removed from 
TRICARE Prime as a result of the Prime Service Area changes. 
The committee is also aware that the Department of Defense is 
required in Section 723 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. 
``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015 to submit a report to the Congress on the status of 
the reduction in TRICARE Prime Service areas. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to brief the House 
Committee on Armed Services no later than July 30, 2015, on 
efforts to ensure access to affordable healthcare due to 
changes in TRICARE costs for affected beneficiaries as a result 
of the reductions in Prime Service Areas.

             Study and Report on the Use of Equine Therapy

    The committee is aware that active duty service members and 
veterans seek out and use additional forms of therapy, such as 
equine therapy, which provides physical, psychological, and 
emotional therapy to individuals through personal interaction 
with trained service horses in a safe and structured 
environment. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a report on the use of equine therapy to treat members 
of the Armed Forces to the House Committee on Armed Services by 
June 30, 2016. The report shall include an assessment of the 
effectiveness of using equine therapy techniques to treat 
members of the Armed Forces with post-traumatic stress disorder 
and other psychological or emotional conditions; the 
effectiveness of using equine therapy techniques to prevent 
suicide; the effectiveness of using equine therapy as a form of 
physical therapy; the prevalence of using equine therapy to 
treat members of the Armed Forces with post-traumatic stress 
disorder or other psychological or emotional conditions; the 
prevalence of using equine therapy as a form of physical 
therapy; and the potential for organizations in the private 
sector that offer equine therapy and the Department of Defense 
to form partnerships to treat members of the Armed Forces with 
physical, psychological, and emotional conditions.

                         Transport Telemedicine

    The committee is aware that the Department of Defense is 
exploring telemedicine solutions successfully used in a 
deployed environment to better enhance medical care provided to 
soldiers deployed or operating at home station. Telemedicine 
can increase efficiency and reduce health care cost by 
projecting medical care to multiple locations, thus avoiding 
transportation delays.
    The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense 
currently lacks a technical solution that captures and 
communicates patient care/condition information beginning at 
the point of injury and continuing until arrival at a medical 
facility. The committee believes the lack of an effective 
telemedicine architecture represents a critical capability gap 
for the Department of Defense medical care. Therefore, the 
committee encourages the Department to support and expand the 
development and deployment of telemedicine across the Military 
Health System.
    The committee also notes that the Army has successfully 
demonstrated the airborne portion of its telemedicine concept 
and is currently writing its telemedicine Concepts Development 
Document. The committee encourages the Army to consider the 
most expeditious method to further develop the requirements for 
telemedicine techniques, capabilities and processes, including 
a Limited User Evaluation and the exploration of commercial 
off-the-shelf technologies that may exist today and would 
effectively work with existing radios and patient care devices.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army 
to brief the House Committee on Armed Services by January 1, 
2016, on the plan for pursuing technical telemedicine 
capabilities.

                              Trauma Care

    The committee continues to support the Department of 
Defense in its efforts to further advance trauma care. However, 
the committee is concerned that with the end of the recent 
military conflicts, these advances and skills may degrade and 
have a negative impact on the readiness of military medicine.
    The committee understands that the Department is creating a 
coordinated, multi-institution, clinical research network of 
civilian and military trauma centers to address the military 
relevant priorities and gaps in trauma care and trauma systems. 
The committee recognizes that the Department is initiating this 
program in fiscal year 2015 and encourages the Secretary of 
Defense to continue to properly resource this research effort. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
brief the House Committee on Armed Services by no later than 
January 31, 2016 on the Department's efforts to create a 
clinical research network of civilian and military trauma 
centers.

               Wounded Warrior Recovery Care Coordination

    Section 1614 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2008 (P.L. 110-181) required that, ``the Secretary 
of Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall jointly 
develop and implement processes, procedures, and standards for 
the transition of recovering service members from care and 
treatment through the Department of Defense to care, treatment, 
and rehabilitation through the Department of Veterans 
Affairs.''
    The committee is concerned that rather than having joint 
programs to advocate on behalf of wounded warriors and ensure a 
comprehensive and seamless rehabilitation, recovery and 
transition; two separate programs exist--the Department of 
Defense Recovery Coordination Care Program and the Department 
of Veterans Affairs Federal Recovery Coordination Program.
    The committee is aware of initial efforts to update 
Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs policies authorized 
by Section 1614 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2008 (P.L. 110-181). Therefore, the committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs jointly to brief the House Committee on Armed Services 
and the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs jointly by August 
1, 2015 on the status of programs authorized by Section 1614 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 
(P.L. 110-181) as well as provide a briefing within 30 calendar 
days of an announcement of an update of policy of a program 
authorized by Section 1614.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


           Subtitle A--TRICARE and Other Health Care Benefits


      Section 701--Joint Uniform Formulary for Transition of Care

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense and the 
Secretary of Veterans Affairs to jointly establish a joint 
uniform formulary for use by the Department of Defense and the 
Department of Veterans Affairs that would include 
pharmaceutical agents critical for the transition of an 
individual from treatment furnished by the Secretary of Defense 
to treatment furnished by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. 
The pharmaceutical agents selected for inclusion on the joint 
uniform formulary shall be related to the control of pain, 
sleep disorders, psychiatric conditions, and other conditions 
determined appropriate by the Secretaries. This section would 
also require the Secretaries to submit a report to certain 
congressional committees by July 1, 2016, on the joint uniform 
formulary established by the Secretaries.

Section 702--Access to Broad Range of Methods of Contraception Approved 
by the Food and Drug Administration for Members of the Armed Forces and 
          Military Dependents at Military Treatment Facilities

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
ensure that every military medical treatment facility has a 
sufficient stock of Food and Drug Administration approved 
methods of contraception.

 Section 703--Access to Contraceptive Method for Duration of Deployment

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
provide a sufficient supply of prescription contraception to a 
female member of the Armed Forces prior to deployment.

 Section 704--Access to Infertility Treatment for Members of the Armed 
                         Forces and Dependents

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
provide uninterrupted access to infertility treatment for 
members of the Armed Forces and their dependents.

                 Subtitle B--Health Care Administration


                  Section 711--Unified Medical Command

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
establish a unified medical command to provide medical services 
to the Armed Forces and other health care beneficiaries of the 
Department of Defense as defined in chapter 55 of title 10, 
United States Code. This section would also require the 
Secretary to (1) develop a comprehensive plan to establish a 
unified medical command; (2) notify the congressional defense 
committees of the time line to establish the unified medical 
command by not later than the date that is 30 days before 
establishing such command; and (3) submit a report to the 
congressional defense committees within 180 days after 
providing such notification on the establishment of the unified 
medical command.

   Section 712--Licensure of Mental Health Professionals in TRICARE 
                                Program

    This section would establish criteria under which licensed 
mental health counselors may be reimbursed under the TRICARE 
program.

   Section 713--Reports on Proposed Realignments of Military Medical 
                          Treatment Facilities

    The section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from 
realigning or restructuring a military medical treatment 
facility until 90 days following the date the Secretary submits 
a report to the congressional defense committees on the 
military medical treatment facility. The report would include 
data on the demographics supported by the military medical 
treatment facility, average daily inpatient census, top five 
diagnoses, civilian medical care in the surrounding area, and 
whether the facility supports a training base, along with other 
data.

     Section 714--Pilot Program for Operation of Network of Retail 
           Pharmacies Under TRICARE Pharmacy Benefits Program

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a pilot program to evaluate whether operating a network 
of preferred retail pharmacies will generate cost savings for 
the Department of Defense. The pilot program would include but 
not be limited to best practices from non-TRICARE health plans 
that use preferred retail pharmacy networks and allow retail 
pharmacies participating in the network of preferred retail 
pharmacies to purchase prescription medication for 
beneficiaries at rates available to the Federal Government. The 
pilot program would commence by May 1, 2016, and terminate on 
September 30, 2018. The Secretary would be required to submit a 
report to the congressional defense committees on the 
implementation plan for the pilot program, an interim report 
semiannually during the period the program is being carried 
out, and a final report after the program terminates.

                 Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters


  Section 721--Extension of Authority for DOD-VA Health Care Sharing 
                             Incentive Fund

    This section would extend the authority for the DOD-VA 
Health Care Sharing Incentive Fund for 5 years, until September 
30, 2020.

  Section 722--Extension of Authority for Joint Department of Defense-
   Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund

    This section would extend the authority for the Joint 
Department of Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs Medical 
Facility Demonstration Fund by one year, until September 30, 
2017.

  TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED 
                                MATTERS

                                OVERVIEW

    Over the past 50 years, acquisition reform efforts focused 
primarily on identifying the failures of the acquisition 
system: a complex system which includes requirements setting, 
funding, and acquisition activities. While some progress has 
been made, the conditions in the early 1980s described by Dr. 
J. Ronald Fox in his seminal work on acquisition reform, 
``Defense Acquisition Reform 1960-2009: An Elusive Goal,'' 
still describe the system today:
    ``Congressional critics, for example, blasted the services 
for rampant cost growth and schedule slippages. Aggressively 
pushing the frontiers of technology prompted cost overruns, 
they argued, while fierce inter-service competition for funds 
encouraged overly optimistic program cost estimates. The 
services, meanwhile, complained about excessive paperwork and 
reporting procedures required by the . . . milestone reviews; 
micromanagement of weapons programs by the [Office of the 
Secretary of Defense (OSD)] and Congress; and unrealistic 
demands for accurate cost estimates, especially when unknowns 
existed in the early stages of weapons program planning. 
Program managers directed similar criticisms at both OSD and 
the services, while OSD criticized the services for failing to 
restrict the number of weapon systems competing for limited 
resources. Other service shortcomings, according to OSD, 
included inadequate support and readiness for fielded weapons 
systems and lengthy acquisition cycles. Industry directed its 
frustrations across the board--at OSD, Congress, and the 
services. Program instability--caused by sudden production 
starts and stops, program stretch-outs, redirections, and long 
decision times--threatened the bottom line and risked financial 
ruin, while micromanagement and excessive surveillance of 
programs by OSD and the services disrupted efficient contractor 
performance. Industry representatives also believed that OSD's 
emphasis on increasing price competition among contractors 
resulted in poor cost realism.''
    The committee is concerned that the incentives of the 
current acquisition system lead to too many defense 
acquisitions concurrently chasing finite dollars. This is 
reflected in the fact that there remains a vast difference 
between Department of Defense budgets and the reality of the 
cost of the weapon systems those budgets acquire. To keep 
weapon system programs alive, the Department continues to 
develop, and Congress continues to accept, fragile acquisition 
strategies that downplay technical issues and assume only 
successful outcomes to high risk efforts. As a result, the 
Nation often ends up with too few weapons, delivered late, at 
too high of a cost, with performance that falls short, and that 
are difficult and costly to maintain.
    In addition to challenges in weapon systems procurement, 
the committee notes that Department of Defense expenditures for 
contracted services have grown in magnitude and face many 
management and oversight challenges. The Department currently 
spends more than half of its contracted dollars on services. 
However, departmental leadership, to include the Department's 
own Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), have limited 
insight into the services being acquired and even less 
awareness of the services that may need to be acquired in the 
future. The Department currently lacks accurate and reliable 
data on contracted services, and the military departments and 
defense agencies have failed to develop processes to use 
available data to inform workforce planning, workforce mix, and 
budget decision making. Budget planning and congressional 
decision-making continue to be hampered by poor data, a failure 
to analyze data that has been acquired, and a lack of general 
transparency.
    Furthermore, the conventional acquisition process is not 
sufficiently agile to support warfighter demands. Congress and 
the Department have consistently expressed concern that urgent 
warfighting requirements for hardware, as well as services, are 
not being met. As a result, several authorities have been put 
in place for rapid acquisition practices as a means to work 
around the conventional acquisition processes. However, many 
still argue that the current processes are so rigid and time-
consuming that the Department is often not able to effectively 
tap into the innovation occurring in the commercial 
marketplace, thereby losing opportunities to improve the 
efficiency and effectiveness of both its business operations 
and warfighting capability.
    The committee recognizes one of the Department's greatest 
challenges is ensuring that the Department's workforce has the 
training, qualifications, and experience needed to make the 
decisions on acquiring goods and services. According to the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and 
Logistics in testimony before the House Committee on Armed 
Services in January 2015, One of the dominant characteristics 
of defense acquisition is its scope and complexity. There are 
no simple solutions to all the myriad problems acquisition 
professionals have to solve. There is no short ``rule set'' 
that tells us all we need to know; it is all about hard work, 
professionalism, and continuous improvement based on data and 
analysis of past experience. Our acquisition professionals must 
be able to think critically on many levels, integrate inputs 
from many perspectives, balance competing needs, make sound 
business and technical decisions, and satisfy many stakeholders 
and customers.''
    The committee also notes that information technology (IT) 
systems are critical enablers for the Department of Defense. As 
the IT budget represents nearly $32.00 billion of the 
Department of Defense's total budget, it also represents a 
major investment area requiring the same rigorous planning, 
analysis, and oversight as any other complex major weapon 
system. The Department recognized this area as a source of 
greater efficiency and has managed to reduce spending in IT by 
several billion dollars across the Future Years Defense 
Program. It remains to be seen if these reductions are driving 
any real change in how the Department does business, or whether 
those reductions are made with any strategic plan in mind.
    The committee will continue to review the Department's IT 
investment planning and review processes, as well as specific 
acquisitions, to improve the ability to identify and reduce 
unwarranted duplication and eliminate programs of little value 
to the warfighter. The committee will pay particular attention 
to how the Department leverages the commercial marketplace, as 
well as the various IT systems of the Department where 
egregious programmatic failures have been made, to provide 
lessons for future acquisitions. The committee also plans to 
focus on how the IT investments of the Department will 
contribute to future warfighting capability, and support a 
defensible architecture that is resilient to cyber-attacks, 
while maintaining the command and control to support mission 
needs.
    The committee's ongoing acquisition improvement efforts 
seek to enhance oversight in these areas and to improve 
processes through a different approach from previous efforts. 
The committee seeks to improve the environment (i.e., human 
resources, culture, statutes, regulations, and processes) 
driving acquisition choices in the Department, industry, and 
Congress. As part of this ongoing effort, the committee 
solicited input from industry, academia, and the Department, as 
well as others during the 113th Congress, and will continue to 
engage these stakeholders during the 114th Congress. In 
addition, the committee held a series of hearings in the 113th 
Congress in order to gather testimony from key acquisition 
leaders and experts. While the committee recognizes that there 
are no ``silver bullet'' reform packages that can immediately 
fix the current acquisition system in a holistic manner, the 
committee intends to take the inputs it has received to make 
progress in the 114th Congress. This effort will be an 
iterative process that will result in direct oversight and will 
be embedded in the committee's regular work throughout the 
114th Congress.
    The committee applauds the efforts of the Secretary of 
Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 
Technology and Logistics to reform defense acquisitions. We are 
encouraged by the Department's rigorous review of statutory 
provisions and submission to the Congress of well thought out 
proposals for positive change that balance the need for 
critical information necessary for oversight. Elsewhere in this 
Act, the committee addresses each of the Department of 
Defense's proposals with some modification. The committee 
pledges to continue to work collaboratively with the Department 
where possible.
    Therefore, the committee is proposing legislation elsewhere 
in this Act which would address some of these problems with the 
recognition that many of these issues require a persistent, 
continuous, and iterative long-term effort in order to identify 
root causes, generate potential solutions, and address 
incentives driving undesirable outcomes.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


 Additions to the Department of Defense's Small Business Policy Website

    The committee recognizes the importance of the ability of 
small businesses to identify, communicate, and receive 
assistance from the appropriate sources as an integral part of 
supporting and maintaining a diverse industrial base, improving 
competition, driving better value to the taxpayer, and sparking 
innovation. Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense, no later than September 30, 2015, to include on the 
Department of Defense's Office of Small Business Policy website 
a link to and information on the Small Business 
Administration's procurement center representatives directory.

           Contracting Activities to Employ Disabled Persons

    The committee is concerned that disabled Americans, many of 
whom are veterans, want to work but need assistance in finding 
employment. The committee is aware that the AbilityOne Program, 
authorized by the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 8501) 
provides employment opportunities for Americans who have 
significant disabilities through Federal contracts with 
qualified, community-based, nonprofit agencies across the 
country. The committee recognizes that the AbilityOne Program 
currently provides diverse products and services, such as 
manufactured equipment for the warfighter, supply-chain 
management, and other essential services at military 
installations and offices. The committee believes that the 
AbilityOne Program network of nonprofit agencies could have the 
capability and capacity to fulfill additional requirements for 
the Department of Defense while also providing valued 
employment opportunities to disabled Americans.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to examine the opportunities for the Department of Defense to 
increase contracting with organizations such as the AbilityOne 
Program or similar organizations that prioritize the hiring of 
disabled Americans. The committee further directs the Secretary 
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services 
not later than March 15, 2016, on the findings of this 
examination, along with recommendations to improve Department 
of Defense efforts to leverage the skills and capabilities of 
such workforce.

             Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund

    In 2008, Congress established the Defense Acquisition 
Workforce Development Fund (DAWDF) to provide a dedicated 
source of funds for recruiting, training, and retaining the 
acquisition workforce. Through fiscal year 2013, the fund 
provided about $2.8 billion and current legislation provides 
another $3.0 billion through fiscal year 2018. In 2012, the 
Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that the 
ability of Department of Defense components to effectively plan 
for and execute efforts supported by DAWDF was hindered by 
delays in the Department's funding processes and an absence of 
clear guidance on the availability and use of funds. As such, 
GAO found that the Department was not collecting and 
distributing funds within the time frames established by the 
legislation, which contributed to high carry-over balances. GAO 
recommended that the Department revise its guidance to clarify 
for all stakeholders when and how DAWDF funds should be 
collected, distributed, and used.
    While the committee supports the continuance of the DAWDF 
and is aware of the positive effects garnered since its 
implementation, the committee remains concerned that the 
Department continues to fail to submit the statutorily required 
report in a timely manner and also continues to struggle to 
provide timely collection and distribution of funds related to 
the DAWDF. The committee also remains concerned that the 
Department has been unable to reduce the amount of funds that 
are carried over to future years and slow to take the steps 
necessary to improve workforce planning and budgeting. 
Elsewhere in this Act, the committee would make the DAWDF and 
the associated expedited hiring authority permanent. The 
committee will continue to work with the Department to address 
the remainder of the outstanding concerns regarding execution 
and reporting on the DAWDF.

               Department Management of Unobligated Funds

    The committee is concerned that the current planning, 
programming, budgeting, and execution (PPBE) process of the 
Department of Defense has created an environment in which 
personnel are incentivized to spend, not save, in procuring 
products and services to meet the needs of the warfighter.
    The committee is aware that on September 10, 2012, the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and 
Logistics and the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) 
issued a joint memorandum to the military departments, the 
combatant commands, and other defense agencies addressing long-
standing Department of Defense issues regarding the way the 
Department manages unobligated funds. In the memorandum, the 
Under Secretaries stressed the importance of spending money in 
a manner that maximizes value to the Department and to the 
taxpayer. The memorandum attempted to address the existing 
culture which measures program execution against established 
obligation benchmarks. In the memorandum, they wrote, ``We will 
continue to hold our Program/contracts teams accountable for 
executing to their planned schedules, but we have to stop 
measuring only benchmark execution as the dispositive method of 
determining whether funds are available for higher 
priorities.''
    On August 20, 2014, the two Under Secretaries issued a 
follow-up memorandum to reaffirm their commitment to improve 
the way the Department manages unobligated funds. This 
memorandum stated that the following tenets should be adopted 
and enforced at all levels of the chain of command and by 
acquisition and financial managers throughout the Department:

          (1) Taxpayer funds should be obligated and ultimately 
        expended only in the taxpayers' interest and if best 
        value is received for the money in support of the 
        warfighter.
          (2) While they can be useful indicators, obligation 
        rates slower than established benchmarks should not be 
        the determinative measuring stick for program execution 
        and must not be regarded as a failure.
          (3) Late obligation of funds should not be presumed 
        to imply that the funds are not needed or that future 
        budgets should be reduced unless there is other 
        evidence to support that conclusion. It may, however, 
        indicate a need to examine whether rephasing funding is 
        appropriate to more properly align with actual program 
        execution.
          (4) Providing savings to the organization, military 
        service, or Department of Defense component as early in 
        the fiscal year as possible should be encouraged and 
        rewarded, professionally and visibly.
          (5) Savings will not be reallocated at any higher 
        Department of Defense level than necessary to fulfill 
        shortfalls in priority requirements.
          (6) Managers who release unobligated funds to higher 
        priorities will not automatically be penalized in their 
        next year's budget with a lower allocation and may be 
        candidates for additional funding to offset prior year 
        reductions.

    The committee supports these efforts. However, the 
committee continues to be made aware of anecdotes that the 
culture inside the Department is to continue to obligate 
funding regardless of necessity in order to either prevent 
those funds from expiring or being reallocated, or as a 
methodology to substantiate the future year's budget request. 
Therefore, the committee directs each of the Under Secretaries 
of the military departments to provide a briefing to the 
Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives not 
later than August 31, 2015, on the current progress achieved 
and challenges remaining in regards to the execution of the 
direction sent in the memo from the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics and the Under 
Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) on August 20, 2014.

   Department of Defense Oversight of Non-Major Defense Acquisition 
                                Programs

    The committee notes that the military services manage many 
hundreds of acquisition category II and III programs each year. 
These programs range from multi-billion dollar aircraft radar 
modernization efforts to soldier clothing and protective 
equipment programs worth tens of millions of dollars. Many of 
these programs represent complex critical warfare capabilities.
    At the committee's request, the Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) undertook a review of these programs (GAO-15-188) 
to determine the extent to which information is available on 
the number of these programs and their cost and schedule 
performance. The committee is concerned by GAO's conclusion 
that the military services' management information was too 
unreliable to assess these programs. The committee is also 
concerned by GAO's conclusion that the military services may 
lack sufficient cost and schedule metrics to assess performance 
trends. The committee notes that the military services have 
taken some steps to improve the reliability of the data and 
considered ways to improve the cost and schedule metrics. The 
committee encourages the military services to take additional 
steps to address the management and oversight issues identified 
by GAO as rapidly as possible.
    The committee directs the Secretaries of the military 
departments to brief the House Committee on Armed Services not 
later than September 15, 2015, on their respective services' 
efforts to improve the reliability of management information 
and to develop sufficient cost and schedule metrics for non-
major defense acquisition programs.

     Education and Training Related to Commercial Item Procurements

    The committee is concerned that current education and 
training programs in the Department of Defense are insufficient 
to fully prepare military and civilian personnel to skillfully 
establish requirements, develop solid acquisition and 
contracting strategies, and conduct market research related to 
commercial item procurements. Therefore, the committee directs 
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 
Logistics, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Personnel and Readiness, to complete a review by October 1, 
2015, of the Department's programs established to develop 
qualified acquisition, requirements, and contingency 
professionals as well as other professional military education 
curricula, and to identify areas where such efforts could be 
enhanced to improve workforce skills and knowledge related to 
commercial item procurements. The committee further directs the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 
Logistics, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Personnel and Readiness, to provide a briefing to the House 
Committee on Armed Services by February 1, 2016, on the 
findings and recommendations of the review.

       Education and Training Related to Setting of Requirements

    The committee notes that, in accordance with section 801 of 
the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364), the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, in consultation with 
the Defense Acquisition University, developed a training 
program to certify military and civilian personnel of the 
Department of Defense with responsibility for generating 
requirements for major defense acquisition programs. Despite 
this progress, the committee remains concerned that the 
currently established education and training programs in the 
Department of Defense are insufficient to prepare the 
requirements workforce to fully define operational 
requirements, ensure trade-offs are fully assessed, and ensure 
the approved requirements are essential, technically feasible, 
and affordable. In too many cases, the committee continues to 
observe programs that are initiated without sound fundamentals 
and that result in ``requirements creep.''
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to conduct a review of the effectiveness of Department's 
program established to develop requirements management 
certification training and the competency requirements for the 
personnel undergoing the training program by October 1, 2015. 
The Secretary of Defense should also include other education 
and training curricula to identify areas where such efforts 
could be enhanced to improve the workforce skills, training, 
and tools related to the setting of requirements for major 
defense acquisition programs, major systems, major automated 
information systems, contingency program management, and 
contracted services. The review should also examine how these 
education and training programs address systems engineering 
analyses and cost estimating as part of the requirements 
development process. The committee further directs the 
Secretary to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed 
Services by February 1, 2016, on the findings of the review 
along with any recommendations to improve the Department's 
requirements-setting skills, training, and tools.

    Education and Training Related to the Conduct of Market Research

    The committee is concerned that the currently established 
education and training programs in the Department of Defense 
are insufficient to fully prepare the military and civilian 
workforce to conduct market research in a manner sufficient to 
ensure confidence in the development of requirements and 
acquisition strategies, and the determination of cost/price 
reasonableness. Therefore, elsewhere in this Act, the committee 
includes a provision that would require the Secretary of 
Defense to provide mandatory training for members of the Armed 
Forces and employees of the Department of Defense responsible 
for the conduct of market research required under section 
2377(c) of title 10, United States Code, and would also require 
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to ensure that such 
training requirements are incorporated into the requirements 
management certification training mandate of the Joint 
Capabilities Integration Development System. Furthermore, 
elsewhere in this report, the committee directs a review of the 
Department's program to improve workforce skills and knowledge 
related to commercial item procurements.

    Enabling Systemic Review of Acquisition Laws and Regulations by 
           Establishing Sunset Dates for Acquisition Statutes

    The committee is concerned that the current approach to 
developing, enacting, and implementing acquisition laws and 
regulations has not been done in a holistic fashion, to a large 
degree because of the enormity and complexity of the statutory 
and regulatory framework. The committee notes that in its 
November 14, 2014, official response to the committee's request 
for its views on how to improve the defense acquisition system, 
the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) stated that, 
``The layering of compliance and reporting requirements on the 
acquisition process without subsequent review inhibits 
improvements to the Defense Acquisition System and the culture 
of its workforce, both of which gradually become increasingly 
bureaucratic. Reviews, when they occur, are infrequent, ad hoc, 
and lack consistent standards of evaluation or predictable 
paths to implementation.'' NDIA went on to recommend that a 
formalized, rolling review of statutory requirements and 
mandates that add costs to the defense acquisition system, in 
terms of time and manpower, should be conducted.
    NDIA further recommended that rather than attempt to tackle 
the entire system in a singular review, consideration should be 
given to methodically establishing expiration dates on current 
statutes in order to allow for a detailed review of a 
manageable set of statutes each year. The committee is 
interested in examining this approach in more detail and looks 
forward to working with all stakeholders to identify potential 
benefits as well as unintended consequences, such as 
instability or uncertainty in the legal framework, resultant 
contractual changes and burdens, increased overhead and costs 
to the Department of Defense, and other factors.

                     Ethics Awareness and Training

    The committee is aware that Government-wide ethics 
regulations for the executive branch (5 C.F.R. Sect. 2638.703-
705) require: (1) an initial ethics orientation for newly hired 
employees; (2) annual ethics training for senior executive 
employees and others who are required to file public financial 
disclosure reports; and (3) annual ethics training for persons 
designated by their agency to file confidential financial 
disclosure reports because of acquisition-related duties, etc.
    The content of this required training is specified in the 
regulations noted above, and is common not only within the 
Department of Defense but also across the entire executive 
branch. While many members of the acquisition workforce are 
required to complete annual ethics training consistent with the 
regulatory requirements associated with their positions, the 
committee is aware that on January 15, 2014, the Under 
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics 
issued a memo requiring 100 percent of the Department's 
acquisition workforce to receive annual ethics training. While 
this Department of Defense-specific requirement did not 
generate new ethics training content or ethics courses, it did 
expand the number of Department of Defense personnel who must 
receive the annual ethics training commonly given across the 
entire executive branch.
    The committee is also aware that the Defense Acquisition 
University includes ethics content in many of its courses and 
the National Defense University's Eisenhower School includes 
ethics lesson for all students in its Defense Strategy and 
Resourcing course. The Eisenhower School also includes an 
ethics case review in its Senior Acquisition course. However, 
the committee notes that many of these educational 
opportunities are provided only at mid- and senior-levels of 
professional development.
    The committee applauds the efforts by the Under Secretary 
to ensure that the entire acquisition workforce is fully aware 
of Government-wide ethics standards and requirements, and to 
have taken an active leadership role in furthering the trust 
in, and credibility of, the acquisition workforce. The 
committee encourages the Under Secretary to continue to enhance 
ethics training and awareness, to include identifying 
opportunities to increase Department of Defense-specific ethics 
training and awareness for new hires and junior members of the 
acquisition workforce.

                        Exchanges with Industry

    The committee applauds efforts by the Secretary of Defense 
to provide opportunities for military officers and defense 
civilian personnel to conduct exchanges with industry, such as 
the Secretary of Defense Corporate Fellows Program (SDCFP). The 
committee is aware that the SDCFP was established by the 
Secretary of Defense in 1994 to become a long-term investment 
in transforming U.S. military forces and capabilities and was 
intended to play a key part of the Department of Defense 
strategy to achieve its transformational goals. While fellows 
have been assigned to such diverse and innovative businesses, 
such as Amgen, Boeing, CNN, Caterpillar, Cisco, Citicorp, 
DuPont, FedEx, General Dynamics, Honeywell, Hewlett-Packard, 
IBM, Lockheed Martin, McKinsey, Merck, Microsoft, Northrop 
Grumman, Oracle, Pfizer, Raytheon, Sears, Southern Company, 
Sun, 3M, and United Technologies, the committee notes that only 
16 individuals are allowed to participate in the program on an 
annual basis. The committee also notes that at its inception 
over 20 years ago, the then-Secretary of Defense stated that 
the SDCFP was not intended to ``produce better technologists or 
acquisition specialists.'' However, the committee believes that 
this program could be leveraged to enhance the professional 
development of the uniformed and civilian workforce of the 
Department of Defense.
    The committee believes that the Department could benefit 
from a comprehensive review of this program, along with other 
fellowship programs and professional development exchanges. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a review of the SDCFP and other fellowship programs and 
professional development exchanges, and to submit a report to 
the congressional defense committees by September 15, 2015, on 
the findings and associated recommendations for strengthening 
the workforce. As part of the review, the Secretary should 
examine the potential effects on career progression and 
retention rates of participants in such programs and provide 
recommendations necessary to promote early, frequent, and 
ethical dialogues between all stakeholders on matters such as 
rules, acquisition policies, and contracting practices.

             Foreign Military Sales Procedural Improvements

    The committee is aware that although decisions on Foreign 
Military Sales (FMS) involve several interagency steps, 
internal Department of Defense processes for considering arms 
transfers remain a significant part of the time frame for 
decision-making. The committee is concerned that there have 
been long delays continue to occur in approving some FMS cases 
and is pleased that the senior management of the Department of 
Defense has been focused on this issue. The current reform 
effort began in August 2008, when the Deputy Secretary of 
Defense established a Defense Senior Steering Group on Arms 
Transfers and Technology Release to review and improve the 
Department's decision-making on arms transfers and release of 
sensitive technology. In July 2010, the Deputy Secretary issued 
a memorandum to revise the Department's Technology Security and 
Foreign Disclosure processes, pursuant to the Steering Group's 
recommendations and Presidential Study Directive 8, issued in 
December 2009. Nevertheless, long delays continue to occur in 
some cases. The committee therefore directs the Undersecretary 
of Defense for Policy to provide the committee and the House 
Committee on Foreign Affairs with a briefing on the results of 
the Deputy Secretary's initiative and memoranda to streamline 
the FMS procedures and additional steps that can be taken to 
reduce the FMS decision-making time frame not later than 
November 1, 2015.

     Impact of Rescinded Solicitations on Efficiency and Innovation

    The committee notes that companies incur substantial costs 
to prepare and submit bids in response to Department of Defense 
solicitations. The committee is concerned that cancellation of 
these solicitations after the preparation of bids can be a 
significant waste of time and money by both the Department and 
the prospective offerors. In addition, to the extent companies 
put considerable time and effort into preparing bids for 
solicitations that are subsequently canceled, these efforts may 
have diverted funding and critical contracting talent that 
could have been better used to advance our technological edge 
through independent research and development.
    The committee therefore directs the Comptroller General to 
submit a report to the congressional defense committees not 
later than March 31, 2016, on the resources committed to 
Department of Defense solicitations that were subsequently 
canceled between fiscal year 2010 and 2014 after bids were 
received. Specifically, the Comptroller General should 
determine: (1) the number of solicitations that were canceled 
after bids were received, (2) whether these cancellations are 
increasing or decreasing and their distribution by Agency or 
military service and contracting command, (3) the bid and 
proposal incurred costs by the companies and the government 
resources committed to these solicitations, (4) the extent to 
which, if any, the bid and proposal costs for these 
solicitations have reduced the funding available for 
independent research and development, and (5) the reasons for 
the cancellation of the solicitations.

        Importance of the North American Defense Industrial Base

    The committee acknowledges the vital role played by the 
defense industrial base in supporting the Armed Forces of the 
United States, noting that a cost-effective, healthy base that 
is responsive to U.S. military requirements is essential to 
achieving U.S. national security objectives. The committee 
further notes that in light of robust trade relations, a shared 
interest in the defense of North America, and responsibilities 
as the only North American allies within the North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization, both the United States and Canada benefit 
from the North American Defense Industrial Base relationship.
    Therefore, the committee is supportive of the strong, 
integrated, and widely dispersed industrial base in North 
America reflecting the economical use of research, development, 
and production resources, as laid out in the Department of 
Defense Instruction 2035.01 dated February 27, 2006. As stated 
in that instruction, ``the Department of Defense shall maintain 
and strengthen defense cooperation with Canada'' and 
``recognizes the differences in capabilities and capacities of 
the defense-oriented industries in the two countries'' with the 
understanding that ``the policy is based on the recognition 
that the United States and Canada have a mutual interest in the 
defense of North America.''

    Improvements in Accountability for Contracted Services Spending

    The committee notes that in a December 2014 report, ``DOD 
Contract Services: Improved Planning and Implementation of 
Fiscal Controls Needed'' (GAO-15-115), the Government 
Accountability Office made a number of recommendations to 
improve the control mechanisms for contracted services spending 
within the Department of Defense, and the Department concurred 
with those recommendations. The committee directs the Under 
Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to brief the House Committee 
on Armed Services not later than September 15, 2015, on the 
Department's efforts to implement effective control mechanisms 
for contracted services spending.

            Improving the Acquisition of Contracted Services

    The committee has been concerned for years with the 
Department of Defense's acquisition of contracted services. 
Proper management of the acquisition of contracted services is 
critical to the proper functioning of the Department. Services 
contractors support the daily missions of the Department, 
whether in the United States or abroad.
    Proper management of the acquisition of contracted services 
begins with acknowledgment of the level of services being 
contracted and identification of the functions that are 
contracted. To that end, the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) mandated an inventory 
of contracts for services. The committee remains disappointed 
that after 8 years, the Department of Defense has failed to 
produce an inventory that is accurate and reliable and that 
facilitates the Department's strategic workforce planning, 
workforce mix, and budget decisionmaking processes, as required 
by law.
    The committee notes that in July 2014, the Department 
issued its annual report, ``Performance of the Defense 
Acquisition System.'' For the first time, this report included 
information on its contracted services, including obligations 
for each service portfolio group, competition rates, and small 
business participation. The Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics also created an 
Acquisition of Services Functional Integrated Product Team to 
coordinate actions and further develop training. The committee 
is encouraged that the Department is close to finalizing a new 
department-wide governing regulation for the acquisition of 
contracted services to improve the process for developing 
requirements for individual service acquisitions and to enhance 
training. The committee is also encouraged that improving the 
acquisition of contracted services is included in the 
Department's ongoing acquisition reform effort, called ``Better 
Buying Power.''
    The committee wants to ensure that these efforts will be 
continued and strengthened in the future. However, the 
committee is concerned that the Department of Defense cannot 
assess its progress, including defining what progress means and 
measuring it. Elsewhere in this report, the committee includes 
directives for the Department to: (1) report on options to 
improve the transparency of contract services in the budget 
requests it submits to Congress; (2) brief the committee on its 
efforts to establish contracted services goals and metrics; (3) 
report on how it intends to coordinate the roles, 
responsibilities, authorities, and resources of the offices 
involved in the acquisition of contracted services; and (4) 
brief the committee on its progress in implementing control 
mechanisms on contract services spending.

     Improving the Efficiency of the Defense Contract Audit Agency

    The committee continues to believe that more must be done 
to improve the efficiency of the Defense Contract Audit Agency 
(DCAA). In 2012, the committee learned that DCAA had not been 
subject to a peer review since 2006, despite the fact that 
according to generally accepted government auditing standards 
(GAGAS), a peer review of government audit agencies should be 
conducted at least every 3 years. As a result, the committee 
included section 1614 in the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239), which assigned 
responsibility to the Inspector General of the Department of 
Defense for conducting peer reviews of Department of Defense 
audit agencies, including DCAA, in 2014.
    As a result of that peer review, the Inspector General 
released a report on August 21, 2014, which found that 11 of 92 
DCAA engagements reviewed during a 6 month period did not 
contain sufficient evidence for Inspector General reviewers to 
understand DCAA's auditing decisions. The Inspector General 
attributed these findings to an ``absence of effective control 
measures in DCAA's policies and procedures'' for compliance 
with GAGAS. Additionally, the Inspector General found that DCAA 
had yet to correct its performance despite being aware of 
issues identified in a September 2009 Government Accountability 
Office report (GAO-09-468) and, previously, by DCAA's own 
quality assurance procedures.
    Furthermore, the committee is aware that the Inspector 
General released a report on September 8, 2014, on its review 
of audits issued by DCAA in fiscal years 2012-13. In conducting 
this review, the Inspector General examined a cross section of 
16 DCAA audits completed between October 2011 and February 
2013, including 5 audits of forward-pricing proposals and 11 
audits of incurred costs and other audit types. The Inspector 
General identified 1 or more significant inadequacies on 13 of 
the 16 selected DCAA audits and found deficiencies in 
compliance with GAGAS in the areas of audit planning, evidence, 
working paper documentation, and supervision. Furthermore, the 
Inspector General review uncovered instances of auditors not 
obtaining adequate cost or pricing data. In addition to these 
findings, the committee continues to be concerned by the slow 
audit processes and extensive backlog at DCAA, which, according 
to the DCAA's annual Report to Congress dated March 24, 2014, 
included roughly 23,000 incurred cost submissions at the end of 
fiscal year 2013.
    The committee recognizes that the DCAA has taken steps to 
improve its performance. However, the committee believes that 
its substandard performance impairs the defense acquisition 
process by incurring avoidable delays and by raising costs for 
the Government. The committee believes that much work remains 
to be done to ensure that DCAA is capable of fully meeting 
applicable standards and of promoting the smooth and 
transparent functioning of the defense acquisition system.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to take immediate steps to address substandard performance by 
DCAA, to reduce its audit backlog, and to minimize costs and 
other harmful consequences for the Federal Government and 
defense industry contractors that are the result of DCAA 
delays. The committee further directs the Secretary to provide 
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later 
than March 1, 2016, on the steps taken to address DCAA 
deficiencies, along with recommendations for any changes to 
statutory or regulatory guidance that may enable the DCAA to 
satisfy all applicable Federal and professional audit 
standards, to complete audits within a reasonable period of 
time, and to avoid placing unnecessary burdens on the 
Government or industry.

    Improving the Financial Auditability of the Defense Finance and 
                           Accounting Service

    The Department of Defense is responsible for more than half 
of the Federal Government's discretionary spending. However, 
according to a Government Accountability Office (GAO) Report 
(GAO-14-10), dated June 23, 2014, it remains one of the few 
major Federal entities that cannot sufficiently account for all 
its spending or assets, and remains the only major Federal 
agency that has been unable to receive an audit opinion on a 
complete set of its department-wide financial statements. The 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public 
Law 111-84) mandated that the Department develop and maintain a 
Financial Improvement and Audit Readiness (FIAR) Plan that 
describes the specific actions to be taken to be ready for 
audit by September 30, 2017. It also required the Plan to 
describe the costs associated with correcting the Department's 
financial management deficiencies and validating that the 
Department's consolidated financial statements are ready for 
audit by 2017. The FIAR Plan is intended to be a strategic plan 
and management tool for guiding, monitoring, and reporting on 
the Department's ongoing financial management improvement 
efforts and for communicating the Department's approach to 
addressing its financial management weaknesses and achieving 
financial statement audit readiness.
    The committee notes that the Department's financial 
management processes and operations remains a ``high risk'' 
area according to the 2015 Government Accountability Office's 
High Risk Report. The GAO found that significant weaknesses in 
the Department's financial and related business management 
systems and processes have adversely affected the Department's 
ability to control costs, ensure basic accountability, 
anticipate future costs and claims on the budget, measure 
performance, maintain funds control, prevent and detect fraud, 
waste, and abuse, address pressing management issues, and 
prepare auditable financial statements.
    The GAO further reported that the Department needs to gain 
assurance that the service components have implemented their 
financial improvement plans effectively prior to asserting 
audit readiness. GAO issued the aforementioned report (GAO-14-
10) with recommendations to help the Department fully implement 
its FIAR guidance with respect to the Defense Finance and 
Accounting Service (DFAS) contract pay. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to brief the House 
Committee on Armed Services not later than August 31, 2015, on 
the corrective actions taken within the Department to address 
the GAO recommendations to improve DFAS in support of producing 
auditable financial statements.

        Improving the Goals and Metrics for Contracted Services

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense has 
taken a number of steps to improve its planning for and 
management of contracted services. Because of the billions of 
dollars the Department spends each year on services and the 
constrained fiscal environment, it is crucial for the 
Department to identify how it can best utilize its financial 
resources and acquire contracted services more efficiently and 
effectively. The committee commends the recent actions taken by 
the Office of Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy to 
establish leadership responsibilities and clarify management 
oversight for contracted services.
    The committee also notes that in spite of failing to 
produce an effective inventory of contracts for services, as 
required by section 2330a of title 10, United States Code, the 
Department is taking action to obtain better contracted 
services data by improving and linking data within its contract 
and financial systems. The Government Accountability Office, 
while recognizing this progress, recommended in 2013 that the 
Department take steps to establish specific and measurable 
goals and metrics to assess progress. The committee is aware 
that the Department is developing and intends to approve 
contracted services goals and metrics in 2015, and supports 
these efforts.
    The committee directs the Under Secretary for Acquisition, 
Technology, and Logistics to brief the House Committee on Armed 
Services not later than September 15, 2015, on the Department's 
progress in establishing contracted services goals and metrics.

     Improving the Requirements Development for and Acquisition of 
                          Contracted Services

    The Department of Defense obligated $284.0 billion for 
goods and services in fiscal year 2014, more than half of which 
was for contracted services. In the committee report (H. Rept. 
113-446) accompanying the Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015, the committee 
noted that Congress has provided new tools and capabilities 
intended to improve the Department's processes for and 
oversight of the acquisition of contracted services. These 
include requiring the establishment of a management structure 
and review process for high-dollar services and the designation 
of senior managers responsible for contract services approval 
and oversight within the Office of the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and the 
military departments.
    Additionally, the committee is encouraged that the 
Department has taken several steps to improve its requirements 
development for and the acquisition of contracted services. 
Most notably, these actions include:
    (1) Developing a departmental instruction focused on the 
acquisition of contracted services;
    (2) Designating the Principal Deputy Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics as the 
Department's focal point for the acquisition of contracted 
services;
    (3) Appointing senior contracted services managers within 
each of the military departments;
    (4) Establishing functional domain experts for each 
portfolio of contracted services the Department acquires; and
    (5) Creating a Services Requirements Review Board.
    However, it is not clear to the committee how each of these 
offices and positions will coordinate with one another and with 
the requirements community, and whether these offices and 
positions have been, or will be, provided sufficient 
authorities and resources to carry out their responsibilities. 
Further, it is not clear whether these offices and positions 
will have the ability to: review ongoing and future 
requirements for the acquisition of contracted services to 
assess them against the Department's strategic priorities; 
recommend changes to acquisition strategies; or establish 
metrics to monitor contract services outcomes and identify 
risks.
    Additionally, the committee notes that the Department has 
failed to produce the inventory of contracts for services 
required in section 2330a of title 10, United States Code, 
which would facilitate the Department's strategic workforce 
planning, workforce mix, and budget decision-making processes.
    Consequently, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to develop a strategy on how the Department intends to 
coordinate the roles, responsibilities, authorities, and 
resources of the offices and positions involved in the 
requirements development for and the acquisition of contracted 
services, and to submit a report to the House Committee on 
Armed Services not later than January 29, 2016, identifying the 
roles, responsibilities, authorities, and resources of each 
office and position, as well as a description of how each 
office and position will coordinate with one another and with 
the requirements community. The strategy also should address 
how the Department will incorporate the outputs of the 
inventory of contract services into the Department's strategic 
workforce planning, workforce mix, and budget decision-making 
processes.
    Elsewhere in this Act, the committee includes a provision 
that would require the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to complete an 
examination of the decision authority related to acquisition of 
services by September 15, 2015, and to develop and promulgate 
guidance to strengthen services contracts requirements 
development, source selection, and contract oversight and 
management. The committee expects that the conclusions from 
this examination of decision authorities and any related 
guidance will inform the development of the strategy for 
coordination of the activities of the offices and positions 
involved in the requirements development for and the 
acquisition of contracted services.

     Improving Transparency of Defense Contracted Services Budget 
                              Information

    The committee remains concerned about the lack of 
transparency in the Department of Defense's spending and 
budgeting for contracted services. Most contracts for services 
are funded through Department of Defense operation and 
maintenance accounts in major categories of services, such as 
knowledge-based or information technology services. The 
President's annual budget request and supporting budget 
documentation, however, provide limited insights into how 
requested funds will be spent on these major categories of 
services. In September 2014, the committee received the 
Department of Defense Report on the Civilian Personnel 
Workforce and Contracted Services Reductions in the Fiscal Year 
2015 Budget, provided in accordance with section 955(d) of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public 
Law 112-239). The committee is concerned that, as noted in the 
report, the Department of Defense does not project the number 
of service contractors beyond the current budget year. Further, 
the committee is concerned that the Department will be unable 
to develop an effective strategy for contracted services if it 
cannot forecast its future needs and determine what changes, if 
any, need to be made. Therefore, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees not later than February 15, 2016, on options 
to enhance the level of detail on contracted services in the 
Department of Defense's budget requests and future years 
defense planning documentation.

      Increased Transparency in Non-Appropriated Fund Contracting

    Department of Defense Non-Appropriated Fund (NAF) 
activities directly support the operations of the military 
exchange services; morale, welfare, and recreation programs; 
and military lodging programs. The committee is aware the 
Department of Defense routinely enters into contracts with 
private-sector vendors in order to provide service members with 
the goods and services that are a critical component of 
quality-of-life and morale, welfare and recreation programs, 
and more than half of these contracts are awarded to small 
businesses.
    The committee is concerned about the lack of a uniform, 
credible process for the pre- and post-award bid protest and 
appeal of contract awards involving NAF contracts. Under 
current policies, bid protests are afforded only limited 
internal review within the applicable activity, and there is no 
consideration by any outside, objective third party. In 
contrast to protests of appropriated fund contracts, once a 
protest of a NAF contract is filed, there is no requirement for 
the NAF activity to suspend award of the contract or to take 
other action regarding ongoing performance until the protest is 
resolved. There is no process analogous to the Government 
Accountability Office's (GAO) role in appropriated-fund 
contract bid protests, and if an unsuccessful bidder seeks 
external review of a disputed contract award, the only recourse 
is in Federal District Court, which may become a lengthy, time-
consuming, and costly process that, as a practical matter, is 
unaffordable for many small businesses.
    The committee is aware that NAF contracting is governed by 
Department of Defense Instruction 4105.67, which requires only 
that NAF contracts be awarded to ``responsible offers offering 
the best value'' as determined by the contracting officer. That 
same contracting officer makes the initial decision to sustain 
or deny a protest. If the protester is dissatisfied with the 
contracting officer's decision, further appeal is limited to 
the ``final authority assigned within the Department of Defense 
component for resolution.'' The committee is concerned this 
situation has created a perception that the NAF bid protest 
process may not be subject to fair adjudication.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to review the adjudication processes of pre- and post-award 
protests of NAF contract decisions and provide a briefing, not 
later than December 1, 2015, to the Committee on Armed Services 
of the House of Representatives on the findings of the review 
and any recommendations to reform current processes to enable 
transparent, objective, and timely consideration of concerns 
raised by contractors competing for award of NAF contracts.

   Inspector General Review of Requirements for Senior Department of 
     Defense Officials Seeking Employment With Defense Contractors

    The committee wishes to be apprised of the Department of 
Defense's record of compliance with section 847 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
181), regarding the requirement for certain senior officials of 
the Department of Defense to obtain written opinion regarding 
the applicability of post-employment restrictions. Therefore, 
the committee directs the Inspector General (IG) of the 
Department of Defense to conduct a review of the database, or 
other electronic or paper records, created pursuant to section 
847 and to submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees, in a manner that ensures protection of 
confidential, personal, or proprietary information, by December 
31, 2015, on the findings of that review. The report should 
include the following:
    (1) The findings of any previous IG reviews to assess 
whether written opinions are being provided and retained in 
accordance with section 847;
    (2) A review of the written ethics opinions that have been 
requested and provided pursuant to section 847 and a 
determination as to whether they comply with section 847;
    (3) A summary, by Department of Defense organization, of 
the total number of opinions issued and total number of 
opinions retained pursuant to section 847;
    (4) A summary of any referrals to, and/or complaints 
received by, the IG or the Department of Justice regarding 
potential violations of post-employment restrictions, including 
the final disposition of such cases;
    (5) The status of any pre-2012 records established pursuant 
to section 847 of Public Law 110-81; and
    (6) Any other matters the IG deems relevant to a 
comprehensive assessment of compliance with section 847.

            Joint Exercises in Operational Contract Support

    The committee applauds efforts by the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff to emphasize the importance of operational 
contracting in support of the missions of the Department of 
Defense. The committee notes that the Chairman began an annual 
exercise series to assess and train Department of Defense 
personnel on the operational contract support capabilities of 
the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, 
service components and commands, and other Federal agencies in 
a variety of exercise scenarios. The committee recognizes that 
special emphasis is being placed on understanding the overall 
socioeconomic and political impacts of contracting support to 
Department of Defense operations, particularly in those 
conducted overseas. The committee supports this ongoing 
approach to developing the workforce involved in contingency 
contracting and encourages continued support and resourcing for 
such exercises.

                         Mentor-Protege Program

    The committee recognizes the importance of the Department 
of Defense Mentor-Protege Program (MPP) and encourages the 
Secretary of Defense to provide strong incentives to designated 
Mentor Department of Defense contractors to assist protege 
firms in enhancing their capabilities to satisfy Department of 
Defense contract requirements and foster successful long-term 
business relationships between Protege and Mentor firms. In 
pursuit of these goals, the committee encourages the Secretary 
to utilize all traditional and non-traditional incentives 
available unless specifically prohibited by public law.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to brief the 
House Committee on Armed Services by November 1, 2015, on the 
Department's plans for improving the use of MPP authorities. 
This briefing should address how to better educate program 
managers and contracting officers on the special authorities of 
MPP, any recommendations for how to improve or strengthen those 
authorities, metrics for assessing the use of MPP authorities, 
and a process for integrating lessons learned from past 
successes in program planning and workforce development for the 
relevant communities.

    Operational Test and Evaluation Processes and Activities of the 
                         Department of Defense

    The committee remains concerned that some of the unforeseen 
increases in cost and schedule in major defense acquisition 
programs are a result of requirements changes or other matters 
that arise during operational test and evaluation (OT&E). In 
the committee report (H. Rept 113-446) accompanying the Howard 
P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2015, the committee directed the Comptroller 
General of the United States to review the OT&E processes and 
activities of the Department of Defense. As part of the review, 
the committee requested the Comptroller General to specifically 
examine the criteria established by the Director of Operational 
Test and Evaluation for determining measures of effectiveness 
and analysis, and the processes established to measure 
suitability and survivability of programs subject to OT&E.
    The committee looks forward to receiving the Comptroller 
General's report of findings and recommendations, and will 
continue to work with the Department to enhance OT&E activities 
to ensure that such activities are conducted in a manner that 
does not unnecessarily drive cost and schedule delays. 
Additionally, elsewhere in this Act, the committee includes a 
provision that would encourage the Director of Operational Test 
and Evaluation to consider the potential for increases in 
program cost estimates or delays in schedule estimates in the 
implementation of policies, procedures, and activities related 
to OT&E, and to take appropriate action to ensure that the 
conduct of OT&E activities do not unnecessarily impede program 
schedules or increase program costs.

        Report on the Effect of Delays in First-Article Testing

    The committee is concerned that small business suppliers to 
the Department of Defense are experiencing interruptions in 
capital and cash flow when the time required to fully evaluate 
first-article test results is extended. The committee is aware 
that Federal Acquisition Regulations allow the contracting 
officer, before approval of the first article, to authorize the 
contractor to acquire specific materials or components, the 
costs of which may be reimbursed through progress payments. The 
committee believes that this situation may be further 
complicated by Federal Acquisition Regulations which do not 
allow progress payments for contracts valued at less than 
$150,000.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to review: (1) the extent to which delays, if any, in 
first-article testing have negatively affected the capital and 
cash flow of contractors; (2) the extent to which delays, if 
any, in first-article testing have affected contracts valued at 
less than $150,000; (3) the reasons for delays in first-article 
testing, including whether the relevant Departmental testing 
agencies are adequately staffed to perform first-article 
testing in a timely manner; and (4) any additional items the 
Comptroller General deems relevant to the review. The committee 
directs the Comptroller General to provide a briefing to the 
House Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 2016, on the 
above review, with a follow-on report delivered not later than 
May 15, 2016.

                          Requirements Process

    While constructive statutory and policy changes have been 
applied to the Department of Defense's acquisition process in 
recent years, the committee remains concerned that a primary 
cause of cost and schedule growth in defense acquisition 
programs continues to be a lack of discipline and rigor in the 
requirements process. The committee has received testimony that 
``requirements creep'' continues to occur after requirements 
are finalized by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council and 
handed off to the acquisition community. The committee has also 
received testimony that this cost growth can be attributed to a 
lack of upfront systems engineering and requirements trade-off 
analysis.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to examine the defense requirements process 
and to submit a report on any findings and recommendations to 
the congressional defense committees by March 31, 2016. The 
Comptroller General's review should determine: (1) whether 
requirements creep occurs during product development; (2) the 
role that systems engineering and requirements trade-off 
analysis, or lack thereof, plays in the development of top-
level and derived requirements; (3) whether the knowledge gap 
between validated requirements and weapon systems 
specifications is the cause of cost growth; and (4) ways to 
improve the requirements-setting process.

  Secretary of Defense Review of Implementing Guidance and Regulation

    In the committee's oversight and review of the defense 
acquisition system, it has identified factors that contribute 
to a less efficient and less responsive system, and found 
several cases in which the Department of Defense's 
implementation of congressionally-directed policy was inaptly 
applied. For example, while the committee required the 
Department to establish plans for mitigating corrosion over the 
life-cycle of weapon systems, recognizing that hardware such as 
ships, planes, and vehicles should be appropriately protected 
against the known effects of corrosion, the Department applied 
this requirement to the procurement of items such as software. 
This overreaction created an undue burden of reporting and 
approval processes throughout the acquisition system.
    In another case, Congress mandated an annual report on the 
Department's spending on contracts for services because the 
relevant data aggregated in the budget justification documents 
was insufficient for congressional oversight and for enabling 
defense officials to make informed decisions with respect to 
contracting for services. However, the Department responded to 
this requirement by submitting an enormous spreadsheet of 
disaggregated data that is time consuming and resource 
intensive to produce and that provides little value to 
consumers, rather than working with Congress to develop a 
product that could benefit decision-makers in the Department 
and in Congress.
    In both of these cases, the committee believes the policy 
guidance is sufficient, but it is concerned that the 
Department's implementation efforts ultimately lead to greater 
inefficiencies and increased costs in the acquisition system. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in 
consultation with the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology and Logistics and the Senior 
Acquisition Executives of the military departments, to initiate 
a targeted review of Department of Defense guidance and 
regulations.
    The goal of such a review should be to identify areas in 
which the guidance or regulation is causing unnecessary 
reporting, delays in decision-making, or other harmful 
consequences, and to take necessary steps to improve such 
guidance or regulation. While the committee expects such review 
may take many months, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to brief the House Committee on Armed Services not 
later than March 1, 2016, on initial findings of the review 
along with recommendations at that time for changes to 
guidance, regulation, or statute that may be needed to clarify 
congressional intent and to streamline implementation of 
congressionally-directed policy.

                Shared Savings through Value Engineering

    The committee notes that the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) issued final revisions to OMB Circular No. A-131, 
``Value Engineering'' in December 2013. Value engineering 
encourages contractors to identify ways to reduce the cost of 
performance on existing contracts for goods and services and to 
share with the Government any savings produced. According to 
OMB, value engineering has generated billions of dollars of 
savings and cost avoidance. However, the committee is aware 
that the use of value engineering has waned in recent years and 
applauds OMB's efforts to reinvigorate its use where 
appropriate. The committee sees great potential for shared 
savings in the Department of Defense's current and future 
acquisitions to the extent tools such as value engineering are 
effectively implemented.
    The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to complete a review not 
later than January 30, 2016, on the extent to which the 
Department is taking advantage of the opportunities for shared 
savings through greater use of value engineering in the 
acquisition of goods and services, the benefits it has 
achieved, barriers to effective implementation, and any 
unintended consequences. The committee further directs the 
Under Secretary to provide a briefing to the House Committee on 
Armed Services not later than March 1, 2016, on the findings of 
the review along with any recommendations to improve the 
effectiveness of the Department's implementation of value 
engineering.

 Small Business Implications of the Department of Defense Use of OASIS 
                            Contract Vehicle

    The committee is aware of recent decisions by the Air Force 
and Army to move professional service contracts on to the 
General Service Administration's One Acquisition Services for 
Integrated Services (OASIS) contract vehicle. The committee 
understands that low overhead rates make the OASIS contract 
vehicle an affordable and attractive option to the Department 
of Defense. However, the committee is also aware of a number of 
small businesses who are currently executing professional 
services contracts for the Army and Air Force who do not 
believe they will be able to compete for OASIS contracts. The 
committee is concerned that the use of the OASIS contract 
vehicle by the Department of Defense may preclude some small 
businesses from competing for some of the same contracts they 
are executing today. Therefore, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the House 
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Small 
Business by October 15, 2015, on how small businesses will be 
affected by the OASIS contract vehicle, including a discussion 
of entry requirements which may be higher on OASIS than most 
other small business acquisition efforts.

            Strategic Minerals Domestic Production Research

    The committee remains concerned about the ability of the 
Department of Defense to mitigate the risks associated with its 
dependence on foreign-sourced strategic minerals. The committee 
is also concerned that techniques used to extract and refine 
these materials are costly, inefficient, and utilize hazardous 
chemicals. Therefore, the committee encourages the Secretary of 
Defense to make it a priority of the Department of Defense to 
identify, develop, document, and evaluate processes to 
domestically produce industrially viable quantities of 
strategic minerals in an affordable, energy-efficient, and 
environmentally safe manner.

 Streamlining Acquisition Reviews by Reducing Unnecessary Documentation

    The committee remains concerned that the process used to 
manage the acquisition of weapon systems is inefficient, 
cumbersome, and bureaucratic, and that an over-focus on 
processes and procedures takes time away from conducting day-
to-day core program management tasks such as contractor 
oversight, engineering, and risk management. As a result, 
section 824 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66) directed the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) to review the Department of Defense 
weapon systems acquisition process to identify processes or 
procedures with little or no value added. The GAO completed the 
review (GAO-15-192) on February 24, 2015, and found that an 
extensive process has built up in which program offices and 
other Department of Defense organizations spend an enormous 
amount of time and effort preparing and reviewing documentation 
that does not appear to correspond to the value gained through 
that effort.
    The committee notes that in April 2013, the Department 
proposed a pilot program to conduct streamlined acquisition 
reviews to reduce the burden of preparing and reviewing 
documentation for select acquisition programs. The Department 
set forth three criteria for programs to qualify: (1) have well 
defined requirements, (2) a strong relationship with industry, 
and (3) a highly qualified and appropriately staffed Government 
team that can remain with the program until the weapon system 
is delivered. However, the committee notes that in the almost 
two years since undertaking this effort, the Department has not 
identified programs which meet these criteria and is 
disappointed that the Department has been unable to conduct 
streamlined acquisition reviews. The committee considers this 
lack of progress as a symptom of the fundamental problems in 
the current acquisition system. The committee encourages the 
Department to redouble its effort to select appropriate 
acquisition programs for this important effort and looks 
forward to reviewing the Department's progress.
    Elsewhere in this Act, in part at the request of the 
Department, the committee includes several provisions that 
would reduce and consolidate reporting requirements in order to 
help reduce this burden. The committee's goal is to reduce or 
eliminate documentation and levels of review where possible 
when they add little or no value.
    The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to review how the 
Department is implementing acquisition statutes and regulations 
and, based on that review, take action within the Under 
Secretary's existing authorities to reduce and eliminate 
unnecessary documentation and reviews. The committee further 
directs the Under Secretary to brief the House Committee on 
Armed Services not later than September 25, 2015, on the 
Department's progress streamlining acquisition reviews, 
selecting programs to pilot test streamlined acquisition 
reviews and recommendations for revision or repeal of statutes 
that preclude streamlined acquisition reviews.

    Study and Report Related to Mandates regarding Suitability for 
      Selection as a Senior Official in the Acquisition Workforce

    The committee is concerned that current processes and 
practices for recruiting, evaluating, and hiring senior 
officials in the acquisition workforce unnecessarily create 
hiring delays and limit the pool of highly qualified candidates 
that would otherwise be willing to accept a position in 
Government service. Therefore, the committee directs the Chair 
of the Defense Business Board to conduct a study of the effects 
of current mandates and processes regarding the determination 
of suitability for the selection of senior officials in the 
acquisition workforce. At a minimum, the assessment should 
examine the following:
    (1) Nomination and confirmation processes;
    (2) Inference of the need for, or specific direction to, 
potential candidates to divest themselves of financial holdings 
or other assets;
    (3) Post-employment restrictions; and
    (4) Any other statutory, regulatory, or cultural barriers 
that may have an unnecessarily detrimental effect on the 
ability of the Department of Defense to recruit, develop, and 
retain highly qualified senior acquisition personnel.
    The committee further directs the Chair of the Defense 
Business Board to submit a report to the House Committee on 
Armed Services not later than March 1, 2016, on the findings of 
the study and provide recommendations to improve the 
Department's ability to recruit, develop, and retain highly 
qualified senior acquisition personnel while appropriately 
mitigating real or perceived conflicts of interest.

         Tracking of Contractor Personnel During Contingencies

    The committee is aware that a February 2015 Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) report (GAO-15-250) found that the 
Department of Defense has ``not updated its life-cycle cost 
estimate or fully defined and assessed its plans to determine 
all resources'' needed to sustain and modernize the tools it 
uses to serve as a repository of information on contracts and 
contractor personnel in contingency operations. The committee 
notes that the Department currently uses the Synchronized 
Predeployment and Operational Tracker-Enterprise Suite for this 
purpose but has not updated its life-cycle cost estimate since 
2010, despite changes in cost and schedule. The committee is 
aware that the Department concurred with the GAO 
recommendations in GAO-15-250 and encourages the Secretary of 
Defense to move forward in its implementation of the GAO 
recommendations in an expeditious manner.

 Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics 
 Assessment of the Value, Feasibility, and Cost of Greater Utilization 
                          of HALT/HASS Testing

    The committee remains concerned about issues of reliability 
in the design and development of critical military system 
components and subcomponents. In the committee report (H. Rept. 
113-102) accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2014, the committee directed the Director of 
the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) to assess the value, 
feasibility, and cost of greater utilization of highly 
accelerated life testing and highly accelerated stress 
screening (HALT/HASS) methodology for ballistic missile defense 
systems and components and to report to the congressional 
defense committees on his findings and recommendations. This 
report served as a useful review of the potential benefits and 
limitations of employing this rigorous testing methodology.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, in 
consultation with the acquisition executives of each service, 
to assess the value, feasibility, and cost of greater 
utilization of this methodology to shorten design and 
development timelines, reduce system and component testing and 
lifecycle costs, and enhance reliability of critical military 
system components and subcomponents. The committee further 
directs the Under Secretary to submit a report no later than 
March 15, 2016, to the congressional defense committees on the 
findings of this assessment, including a description of any 
plans regarding the use of such methodology in on-going or 
future defense programs, along with any recommendations to 
improve the Department of Defense's efforts.

 Use of Lowest Price, Technically Acceptable Source Selection Processes

    The committee applauds recent efforts by the Department of 
Defense to cut costs and save taxpayer dollars in defense 
procurements. These efforts, such as the ``Better Buying 
Power'' initiatives, seek to achieve greater efficiencies 
through affordability, cost control, and the elimination of 
unproductive processes or bureaucracy. Such efforts also seek 
to promote competition. However, the committee is concerned 
that this well-intentioned effort by the Department to lower 
procurement costs has frequently resulted in the use of a 
lowest price, technically acceptable (LPTA) methodology when a 
best-value trade-off approach may have been in the best 
interests of the Government.
    According to the Federal Acquisition Regulation, the goal 
of the acquisition system is to ``deliver on a timely basis the 
best value product or service to the customer, while 
maintaining the public's trust and fulfilling public policy 
objectives.'' The committee is aware that regulations allow 
Department of Defense officials to elect to use the LPTA 
process in cases where the requirement is clearly defined and 
the risk of unsuccessful contract performance is minimal. In 
such cases, the Department may determine that cost or price 
should play a dominant role in the source selection. However, 
regulations also provide the Department of Defense the 
flexibility to use a trade-off process in acquisitions where 
the requirement is less definitive, more development work is 
required, or the acquisition has a greater performance risk. 
This approach allows for consideration of non-cost evaluation 
factors, such as technical capabilities or past performance.
    The committee remains concerned that despite statutory and 
regulatory authorities which allow for flexibility in 
contracting approaches, Department of Defense personnel may be 
using LPTA strategies when mission performance is essential, or 
when requirements are not clearly defined or are emerging due 
to operational demands. Therefore, the committee encourages the 
Secretary of Defense to take the necessary steps to ensure that 
contracting officials use LPTA contracting approaches only in 
appropriate circumstances such as those in which the 
requirement is clearly defined and the risk of unsuccessful 
contract performance to the mission is minimal.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


  Section 800--Sense of Congress on the Desired Tenets of the Defense 
                           Acquisition System

    This section would express the sense of Congress that past 
acquisition reform efforts have not significantly changed the 
acquisition of military equipment and services. The committee 
proposes a different approach from previous efforts by seeking 
to improve the environment driving acquisition decisions in the 
Department of Defense, industry, and Congress. This section 
would identify key acquisition tenets that should govern the 
Department's acquisition system once reforms are implemented.

             Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management


     Section 801--Report on Linking and Streamlining Requirements, 
         Acquisition, and Budget Processes within Armed Forces

    This section would require the Chief of Staff of the Army, 
the Chief of Naval Operations, the Chief of Staff of the Air 
Force, and the Commandant of the Marine Corps to each submit a 
report to the congressional defense committees on their efforts 
to leverage their existing statutory authorities in a manner 
that links and streamlines their services' requirements, 
acquisition, and budget processes in order to foster improved 
outcomes. These reports will inform the committee's 
consideration of recommendations that the statutory authorities 
of the senior military officers should be expanded to provide 
additional influence on the acquisition system.
    The committee is concerned that the requirements process, 
the acquisition system, and the budget process are not 
sufficiently aligned to provide a desirable outcome. Moreover, 
the committee believes that previous efforts to reform the 
defense acquisition system have failed to consider the role of 
the individuals and leaders, who are not a formal part of the 
acquisition workforce, in the outcomes generated by the system. 
The committee believes the senior military officer of each 
service, as well as military personnel who are not formally 
considered part of the acquisition workforce, are a critical 
part of the entire acquisition chain from requirements 
determination to the sustainment of a fielded system.
    Furthermore, the committee is concerned that many uniformed 
personnel are placed in roles that require them to make 
decisions related to, or to provide oversight of, defense 
procurements, yet they are not considered part of the 
acquisition workforce and not subject to required training on 
these matters. Therefore, these personnel are generally not 
provided dedicated training to enable them to be successful in 
these duties. While many of these individuals have primary duty 
responsibilities in roles such as surface warfare officers, 
artillery officers, pilots, or infantrymen, they also have 
pivotal roles in requirements development, contract award or 
renewal, contract management and oversight, and budget 
processes. The committee believes there may be gaps in training 
and preparation of these personnel, but is also aware that with 
high operational tempo and other professional military 
education requirements, the levying of additional training and 
education related to requirements, acquisition, and budget 
processes may not be feasible or could harm the career 
progression of these personnel by taking them away from their 
primary duties.
    The committee notes that while the senior military officer 
of each service may not have broad authorities with respect to 
the acquisition process, the senior military officer has 
significant authority and influence with respect to the 
requirements and budgeting processes, as well as authority over 
all uniformed personnel, including those not considered part of 
the acquisition workforce, who are assigned to roles that 
require them to make decisions related to defense procurements. 
As a result, the committee believes that the senior military 
officers of each of the services are uniquely empowered to 
promote integration among the requirements, acquisition, and 
budget processes. This includes the training and development of 
all personnel to have a basic understanding of these complex 
matters.
    Elsewhere in this Act, the committee also includes a 
provision that would require the military service chiefs to 
review current authorities related to defense acquisitions for 
the purpose of developing such recommendations that the Chief 
concerned or the Commandant considers necessary to further or 
strengthen the role of the Chief concerned or the Commandant in 
the development of requirements, acquisition processes, and the 
associated budget practices of the Department of Defense.

 Section 802--Required Review of Acquisition-related Functions of the 
                  Chiefs of Staff of the Armed Forces

    This section would require the Chief of Staff of the Army, 
the Chief of Naval Operations, the Chief of Staff of the Air 
Force, and the Commandant of the Marine Corps to review their 
current authorities provided in sections 3033, 5033, 5043, and 
8033 of title 10, United States Code, and other relevant 
statutes and regulations related to defense acquisitions for 
the purpose of developing such recommendations that the Chief 
concerned or the Commandant considers necessary to further or 
strengthen the role of the Chief concerned or the Commandant in 
the development of requirements, acquisition processes, and the 
associated budget practices of the Department of Defense. This 
section would also require the Chief concerned and the 
Commandant to each submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees not later than March 1, 2016, with recommendations 
developed as a result of the review and a description of the 
actions the Chief concerned or the Commandant is taking within 
the Chief's or Commandant's existing authorities to implement 
those recommendations.

   Section 803--Independent Study of Matters Related to Bid Protests

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
enter into a contract, within 180 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, with an independent research entity that 
is a not-for-profit entity or a federally funded research and 
development center with appropriate expertise and analytical 
capability to carry out a comprehensive study of factors 
leading to bid protests. The study shall examine the variable 
influences on the net benefit (monetary and non-monetary) to 
contractors either filing a protest or indicating intent to 
file a protest. This section would also require that not later 
than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
independent entity shall provide the results of the study along 
with any recommendations it may have to the Secretary and the 
congressional defense committees.

              Section 804--Procurement of Commercial Items

    This section would amend chapter 140 of title 10, United 
States Code, by adding a new section that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish and maintain a centralized 
capability with the resources and expertise to oversee the 
making of commercial item determinations for Department of 
Defense procurements and to provide public access to Department 
of Defense commercial item determinations.
    This section would also amend section 2306a(b) of title 10, 
United States Code, to allow the contracting officer to presume 
that a prior commercial item determination made by a military 
department, Defense Agency, or other component of the 
Department of Defense shall serve as a determination for 
subsequent procurements of such items. If the contracting 
officer instead proceeds with a procurement of an item 
previously determined to be commercial using procedures other 
than those authorized for commercial item procurement, this 
section would require the contracting officer to request a 
review of the prior commercial item determination by the head 
of the contracting activity. The section would require the head 
of the contracting activity to, within 30 days of receiving a 
request for review, either confirm that the prior determination 
was appropriate or issue a revised determination. The committee 
expects that in conducting such a review, the head of the 
contracting activity would consult with the centralized 
capability, required to be established by the Secretary of 
Defense under this section, to inform such determinations. 
Nothing in this section or the amendments made by this section 
shall affect the meaning of the term ``commercial item'' under 
subsection (a)(5) of section 2464 of title 10, United States 
Code.

 Section 805--Modification to Information Required to be Submitted by 
   Offeror in Procurement of Major Weapon Systems as Commercial Items

    This section would amend section 2379 of title 10, United 
States Code, by striking the requirement that in making a 
determination that an item is a commercial item, the 
contracting officer shall determine in writing that the offeror 
of the item has submitted sufficient information to evaluate, 
through price analysis, the reasonableness of the price for 
such item.

  Section 806--Amendment Relating to Multiyear Contract Authority for 
                        Acquisition of Property

    This section would amend section 2306b(a) of title 10, 
United States Code, to allow the head of an agency to enter 
into multiyear contracts for the acquisition of property if 
there is a reasonable expectation that the use of a multiyear 
contract would result in lower total anticipated costs of 
carrying out the program than if the program were carried out 
through annual contracts. This section would strike the 
existing requirement that the head of an agency must determine 
that substantial savings would be achieved before entering into 
a multiyear contract.

    Section 807--Compliance with Inventory of Contracts for Services

    This section would limit the expenditure of funds 
authorized for the operation of the Office of the Under 
Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness until certain 
conditions are met regarding the Department of Defense's 
compliance with the requirement for an inventory of contracts 
for services.
    The committee notes that the Under Secretary has not fully 
implemented the plan for documenting the number of full-time 
contractor employees required by section 8108(c) of the 
Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations 
Act, 2011 (Public Law 112-10), and has not fully complied with 
the requirement in section 2330a of title 10, United States 
Code, to establish a data collection system to provide 
management information with regard to each purchase of services 
by a military department or defense agency.
    The committee further notes that in a May 9, 2014, letter 
to the Congress, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel 
and Readiness stated that the Department of Defense had adopted 
``the reporting tool and successful processes that the Army has 
used for the past several years with its centralized Contractor 
Manpower Reporting Application (CMRA)'' and that the CMRA 
software had been made available for all components. However, 
in January 2015, the Under Secretary's office briefed the 
committee that a ``single application [is] less than ideal'' 
and that the Under Secretary is now seeking to develop 
additional hardware, software, network, application, and user 
interface solutions for each component of the Department of 
Defense.
    Additionally, the Under Secretary stated that ``in [fiscal 
year] 2015 the Department will have additional dedicated 
resources in this area'' by establishing a Total Force 
Management Support Office ``to comprehensively implement 
[Enterprise] CMRA across the Department.'' However, the 
committee is aware that little has been done to establish such 
an office or otherwise define business processes for compiling, 
reviewing, and using inventory data to inform decision-making.
    Furthermore, the committee is also aware that the 
Department's lack of progress on the inventory was confirmed by 
the Department of Defense Inspector General who reported on 
April 15, 2015, that of the 33 Components that submitted an 
inventory, only 10 Components included all 8 required elements 
in their certification letters.
    The committee continues to believe an inventory of 
contracts for services is a fundamental tool for assisting an 
agency in better understanding how contracted services are 
being used to support missions and operations and whether 
contractors' skills are being utilized in an appropriate 
manner.

         Subtitle B--Workforce Development and Related Matters


Section 811--Amendments to Department of Defense Acquisition Workforce 
                            Development Fund

    This section would amend section 1705 of title 10, United 
States Code, to make permanent the authority for both the 
Defense Acquisition Workforce Develop Fund and the associated 
expedited hiring authority.

   Section 812--Dual-Track Military Professionals in Operational and 
                        Acquisition Specialties

    This section would amend section 1722a of title 10, United 
States Code, by reinstituting a dual-tracking system of primary 
and functional secondary career fields for officers and 
noncommissioned officers serving in acquisition positions by 
dual-tracking such personnel in operational and acquisition 
career fields under the shared accountability and 
responsibility of the military service chiefs and component 
acquisition executives for career path management and 
selections. This section would create a needed balance of 
experience between acquisition and operations.

Section 813--Provision of Joint Duty Assignment Credit for Acquisition 
                                  Duty

    This section would amend section 668 of title 10, United 
States Code, by adding to the term ``joint matters''' the 
inclusion of acquisition matters addressed by military 
personnel. This section would enable military acquisition 
professionals to broaden their promotion and career 
opportunities by making it easier for them to receive joint 
professional credit. It would also result in an end to the 
double experience requirement for military acquisition 
professionals who must meet the joint duty assignment 
requirement for promotion in addition to the Defense 
Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act (chapter 87 of title 10, 
United States Code) certification requirement. Lastly, it would 
result in the award of joint duty assignment credit to officers 
who serve in acquisition positions, thus precluding acquisition 
assignments from impeding career progression.

  Section 814--Requirement for Acquisition Skills Assessment Biennial 
                        Strategic Workforce Plan

    This section would amend section 115b of title 10, United 
States Code, which requires the Secretary of Defense to submit 
a biennial strategic workforce plan on critical skills and 
competencies of the civilian employee workforce of the 
Department of Defense, to include an additional assessment of 
new or expanded critical skills and competencies needed by the 
civilian employee workforce to address new acquisition process 
requirements established by law or policy.

Section 815--Mandatory Requirement for Training Related to the Conduct 
                           of Market Research

    This section would amend section 2377 of title 10, United 
States Code, by adding a requirement that the Secretary of 
Defense shall provide mandatory training for members of the 
Armed Forces and employees of the Department of Defense 
responsible for the conduct of market research required under 
subsection (c) of section 2377 of title 10, United States Code. 
Such mandatory training shall, at a minimum:
    (1) Provide comprehensive information on the subject of 
market research, and the function of market research in the 
acquisition of commercial items;
    (2) Teach best practices for conducting and documenting 
market research; and
    (3) Provide methodologies for establishing standard 
processes and reports for collecting and sharing market 
research across the Department.
    Furthermore, this section would require the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff to ensure that such training requirements 
are also incorporated into the requirements management 
certification training mandate of the Joint Capabilities 
Integration Development System.

Section 816--Independent Study of Implementation of Defense Acquisition 
                     Workforce Improvement Efforts

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense, within 
30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, to enter 
into a contract with an independent research entity that is a 
not-for-profit entity or a federally funded research and 
development center with appropriate expertise and analytical 
capability to carry out a comprehensive study of the Department 
of Defense's strategic planning related to the defense 
acquisition workforce. The study would provide a comprehensive 
examination of the Department's efforts to recruit, develop, 
and retain the acquisition workforce, to include: a specific 
review of the implementation of the Defense Acquisition 
Workforce Improvement Act (including chapter 87 of title 10, 
United States Code); the application of the Defense Acquisition 
Workforce Development Fund (as established under section 1705 
of title 10, United States Code); and the effectiveness of 
professional military education programs, including fellowships 
and exchanges with industry.
    This section would also require that the independent 
research entity provide a report to the Secretary, not later 
than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
containing the results of the study and recommendations to 
improve the acquisition workforce. Furthermore, this section 
would require the Secretary of Defense to provide the report, 
along with any additional views or recommendations of the 
Secretary, to the congressional defense committees not later 
than 30 days after the date of the Secretary's receipt of the 
report.

  Section 817--Extension of Demonstration Project Relating to Certain 
        Acquisition Personnel Management Policies and Procedures

    This section would amend section 1762 of title 10, United 
States Code, by extending the demonstration project relating to 
certain acquisition personnel management policies and 
procedures through 2020.

       SUBTITLE C--WEAPON SYSTEMS ACQUISITION AND RELATED MATTERS


 Section 821--Sense of Congress on the Desired Characteristics for the 
                             Weapon Systems

    Acquisition System This section would express the sense of 
Congress on the acquisition tenets needed to improve weapon 
system acquisitions. This section includes a series of findings 
that the current weapon systems acquisition system, despite 
significant and repeated attempts at acquisition reform, 
continues its track record of too many cancellations, schedule 
slippages, cost overruns, and failures to deliver timely 
solutions to meet the needs of the Armed Forces. This section 
would also propose that any new system should be characterized 
by highly disciplined program initiation, agile program 
execution, and balanced oversight.

   Section 822--Acquisition Strategy Required for Each Major Defense 
                  Acquisition Program and Major System

    This section would establish a new section in chapter 144 
of title 10, United States Code, that requires an acquisition 
strategy for each major defense acquisition program and each 
major system approved by a Milestone Decision Authority (MDA). 
This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to issue and maintain 
requirements for the content of these acquisition strategies as 
well as the review and approval process for these strategies. 
This section would also require the Under Secretary to ensure 
that each strategy addresses several considerations, including: 
the proposed business, technical management, and sustainment 
approaches; how it will be implemented with available 
resources; industrial base considerations; risk management 
approaches; contract strategies; and other considerations as 
required in current statute. Additionally, this section would 
require the MDA to review and approve, as appropriate, these 
acquisition strategies at key decision points in the 
acquisition process.
    This section is intended to consolidate various existing 
requirements by allowing other statutory reporting requirements 
to be met with this single acquisition strategy requirement and 
to streamline the acquisition strategy approval process. This 
section also repeals section 803 of the Bob Stump National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107-
314) that established specific requirements for spiral 
development strategies, many elements of which will now be met 
with this single acquisition strategy requirement.

 Section 823--Revision to Requirements Relating to Risk Management in 
  Development of Major Defense Acquisition Programs and Major Systems

    This section would establish a new section in chapter 144 
of title 10, United States Code, that requires the program 
acquisition strategy for each major defense acquisition program 
or major system to include an identification of major program 
risks and a risk management and mitigation strategy. This 
section would also provide acquisition programs with greater 
flexibility in the ways programmatic risk can be addressed 
beyond the competitive prototyping requirement in section 203 
of the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009 (Public 
Law 111-23).
    Competitive prototyping remains an acquisition best 
practice, particularly as a means to reduce risk during 
technology development and the period leading up to the 
critical design review. However, the committee recognizes that 
prototyping may not be appropriate for all defense acquisition 
programs.
    Finally, this section would repeal section 203 of Public 
Law 111-23.

Section 824--Modification to Requirements Relating to Determination of 
 Contract Type for Major Defense Acquisition Programs and Major Systems

    This section would amend section 2306 of title 10, United 
States Code, by adding a new subsection, and repealing the 
requirements in certain subsections of section 818 of the John 
Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 
(Public Law 109-364), relating to the modification of 
Department of Defense regulations. The committee expects the 
Department to adjust regulations and guidance as appropriate. 
The new subsection of section 2306 of title 10, United States 
Code, would require the Secretary of Defense to ensure that an 
acquisition strategy for a major defense acquisition program, 
major system, or a major automated information system includes: 
an identification of and justification for the type of contract 
proposed; an explanation of how the contract type relates to 
the level of program risk; an explanation of how the use of 
incentives in the contract supports the objectives of the 
program; and an explanation of how the plans for the program or 
system to reduce risk enable the use of fixed-price elements in 
subsequent contracts.
    The committee has observed that, over time, the Department 
has encouraged the use of one contract type over another and 
believes that Department should select appropriate contract 
types best suited to the program objectives and the level of 
program risk. Therefore, this section would also enable the 
Secretary of Defense to establish in guidance that the use of 
incentives in contracts can be appropriate.

  Section 825--Required Determination before Milestone A Approval or 
            Initiation of Major Defense Acquisition Programs

    This section would amend section 2366a of title 10, United 
States Code, to require the Milestone Decision Authority to 
make a written determination, in lieu of a certification, 
before approving milestone A. This section would also require 
an explanation of the basis for the determination to be 
submitted to a congressional defense committee upon request.
    The committee remains concerned that the process used to 
manage the acquisition of weapon systems is inefficient, 
cumbersome, and bureaucratic, and that an over-focus on 
paperwork and legal reviews takes time away from conducting 
day-to-day core program management tasks such as contractor 
oversight, engineering, and risk management. While the 
substantive program management work necessary to support a 
determination remains consistent with that needed to support a 
certification, a determination requires less bureaucratic 
reviews of documentation than a certification. Because the 
Department would be required to make the basis for the 
determination available to the committee upon request, the 
committee would retain access to the information needed for 
oversight and accountability, while enabling a reduction in the 
time and effort the Department spends on processes that do not 
appear to provide much added value.

Section 826--Required Certification and Determination before Milestone 
            B Approval of Major Defense Acquisition Programs

    This section would amend section 2366b of title 10, United 
States Code, to require the Milestone Decision Authority (MDA) 
to make a written determination, instead of a certification, 
for some of the existing certification requirements before 
approving milestone B. This section would also require an 
explanation of the basis for the determination to be submitted 
to a congressional defense committee upon request.
    The committee remains concerned that the process used to 
manage the acquisition of weapon systems is inefficient, 
cumbersome, and bureaucratic, and that an over-focus on 
paperwork takes critical time away from conducting day-to-day 
core program management tasks such as contractor oversight, 
engineering, and risk management. The committee believes that 
requiring a determination by the MDA, instead of a legal 
certification, in certain cases could increase the efficiency 
and effectiveness of the Department of Defense's acquisition 
review process, while reducing the time and effort the 
Department spends on processes that do not appear to provide 
much added value.
    Because the milestone B approval represents a major 
commitment of resources by the Department, this section retains 
certain certification requirements, including of the business 
case itself, that the business case is supported by a 
preliminary design review, and that the technology to be used 
has been demonstrated. However, the committee believes some 
areas, such as market research, may only need a determination 
by the MDA. In those areas requiring a determination, the 
committee would retain access to the information needed for 
oversight and accountability because the Department would be 
required to make the basis for the determination available to 
the committee upon request.

                  Subtitle D--Industrial Base Matters


   Section 831--Codification and Amendment of Mentor-Protege Program

    This section would revise and codify section 831 the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991 (Public 
Law 101-510).
    The committee is aware that the Department of Defense 
Mentor-Protege Program was established in 1991 to allow small 
businesses, or proteges, to partner with large companies, or 
mentors, under individual, project-based agreements to position 
those proteges to better compete for prime contract or 
subcontract awards. Mentors benefit by expanding their sourcing 
plans to these small firms; proteges benefit by developing 
needed business and technical capabilities to diversify their 
customer base. Past reviews by the Government Accountability 
Office have indicated that ``the Mentor-Protege Program was a 
valuable experience and enhanced business development'' and 
that ``[n]inety-three percent of responding proteges reported 
the Mentor-Protege Program enhanced, at least to some degree, 
their firms'' overall capabilities.'' The committee believes 
that the Mentor-Protege Program is a valuable tool for the 
Department of Defense and is helpful in creating a strong 
foundation to see it used more broadly by the military services 
and agencies, and improve linkages between small, non-
traditional contractors and larger, mainstream defense 
contractors.

        Section 832--Amendments to Data Quality Improvement Plan

    This section would amend section 15(s) of the Small 
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644(s)) to require the Administrator of 
the Small Business Administration to annually provide to the 
Committee on Small Business of the House of Representatives and 
the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship of the 
Senate certification of the accuracy and completeness of data 
reported on bundled and consolidated contracts. This section 
would also require the Comptroller General of the United States 
to provide a report to the aforementioned committees not later 
than the first day of fiscal year 2019 on the effectiveness of 
the certification process and an assessment of whether 
contracts were accurately labeled as bundled or consolidated.

     Section 833--Notice of Contract Consolidation for Acquisition 
                               Strategies

    This section would amend section 44(c)(2) of the Small 
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 657q(c)(2)) to require the senior 
procurement executive or chief acquisition officer to announce 
through a public website that a determination has been made to 
bundle or consolidate contracts within 1 week of making the 
determination, but no later than 1 week prior to the issuance 
of a solicitation.
    This section would also amend section 15(e)(3) of the Small 
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644(e)(3)) to require the head of a 
contracting agency to announce through a public website that a 
determination has been made regarding a substantial bundling of 
contracts for a proposed procurement plan no later than 1 week 
after such a determination is made, and at least 1 week prior 
to the publication of any solicitation.

 Section 834--Clarification of Requirements Related to Small Business 
                         Contracts for Services

    This section would amend section 8(a)(17) of the Small 
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(a)(17)) to clarify that the statute 
applies to contracts for goods, but not services or 
construction. The committee notes that the non-manufacturer 
rule (NMR) was established to ensure that, when competition for 
a contract for goods is restricted to small businesses, the 
goods ultimately purchased were indeed the product of a small 
business. However, the committee is concerned that the NMR is 
being applied to services and construction contracts and could 
limit small business participants contracting for services and 
construction to the Federal Government. Therefore, the 
committee believes this clarification to section 8(a)(17) is 
necessary.

   Section 835--Review of Government Access to Intellectual Property 
                     Rights of Private Sector Firms

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
enter into a contract with an independent entity with 
appropriate expertise to conduct a review of Department of 
Defense regulations and practices related to Government access 
to and use of intellectual property rights of private sector 
firms. In conducting the review, the independent entity shall 
consult with the National Defense Technology and Industrial 
Base Council. This section would require the Secretary to 
submit a report on the findings of the independent entity, 
along with a description of any actions that the Secretary 
proposes to revise and clarify laws or that the Secretary may 
take to revise or clarify regulations related to intellectual 
property rights to the congressional defense committees not 
later than March 1, 2016.

 Section 836--Requirement that Certain Ship Components be Manufactured 
             in the National Technology and Industrial Base

    This section would amend section 2534(a) of title 10, 
United States Code, and would require certain auxiliary ship 
components to be procured from a manufacturer in the national 
technology and industrial base.

  Section 837--Policy Regarding Solid Rocket Motors Used in Tactical 
                                Missiles

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
ensure that every tactical missile program of the Department of 
Defense that uses solid propellant as the primary propulsion 
system shall have at least one rocket motor supplier within the 
national technology and industrial base (as defined in section 
2500(1) of title 10, United States Code), and would allow the 
Secretary to waive this requirement in the case of compelling 
national security reasons.

Section 838--FAR Council Membership for Administrator of Small Business 
                             Administration

    This section would amend section 1302 of title 41, United 
States Code, by adding the Administrator of the Small Business 
Administration to the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council.

     Section 839--Surety Bond Requirements and Amount of Guarantee

    This section would amend chapter 93 of subtitle VI of title 
31, United States Code, to increase the amount of surety bond 
guarantees from the Small Business Administration from 70 
percent to 90 percent. It would also require the Comptroller 
General of the United States to study the surety bond program 
and to examine, among other issues, the impact of this 
amendment on such program.

    Section 840--Certification Requirements for Procurement Center 
   Representatives, Business Opportunity Specialists, and Commercial 
                         Market Representatives

    This section would amend section 15 and section 4 of the 
Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644 and 633, respectively) to set 
certification requirements for Commercial Market 
Representatives and to modify the current certification 
requirements for Procurement Center Representatives and 
Business Opportunity Specialists.

 Section 841--Including Subcontracting Goals in Agency Responsibilities

    This section would amend section 1633(b) of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-
239) to include consideration of success in attainment of small 
business subcontracting goals as part of agency 
responsibilities.

Section 842--Modifications to Requirements for Qualified HUBZone Small 
            Business Concerns Located in a Base Closure Area

    This section would amend section 152(a)(2) of title I of 
division K of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 (15 
U.S.C. 632 note) to extend the length of time covered base 
closure areas may participate in the Historically Underutilized 
Business Zone (HUBZone) program to either eight years or until 
the Small Business Administration announces which areas will 
qualify for the HUBZone program after the next decennial census 
data is released. This section would also amend section 
3(p)(5)(A)(i)(l) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
632(p)(5)(A)(i)(I)) to include allowed covered base closure 
area HUBZone participants to meet the program's employment 
requirements by hiring 35 percent of their employees from any 
qualified HUBZone, and would amend section 3(p)(4)(D) of the 
Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632(p)(4)(D)) to extend physical 
boundaries of the covered base closure area, for purpose of the 
HUBZone program, to include lands within a 25 mile radius of 
the base.

                Section 843--Joint Venturing and Teaming

    This section would amend section 15(e)(4) and 15(q)(1) of 
the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644(e)(4) and 15 U.S.C. 
644(q)(1), respectively) by requiring agencies to give due 
consideration to the capabilities and past performances of the 
small businesses that submit offers as teams or joint ventures 
when the contract is bundled, consolidated, or for a multiple 
award contract. The committee expects that the Administrator of 
the Small Business Administration will issue any regulations 
necessary to carry out the amendments made by this section not 
later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act.

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters


Section 851--Additional Responsibility for Director of Operational Test 
                             and Evaluation

    This section would amend section 139 of title 10, United 
States Code, by including a new subsection that would require 
the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation to consider the 
potential for increases in program cost estimates or delays in 
schedule estimates in the implementation of policies, 
procedures, and activities related to operational test and 
evaluation, and to take appropriate action to ensure that the 
conduct of operational test and evaluation activities do not 
unnecessarily impede program schedules or increase program 
costs.

    Section 852--Use of Recent Prices Paid by the Government in the 
                 Determination of Price Reasonableness

    This section would amend section 2306a of title 10, United 
States Code, by adding a new paragraph that would require a 
contracting officer to consider evidence provided by an offeror 
of recent purchase prices paid by the Government for the same 
or similar commercial items in establishing price 
reasonableness if the contracting officer is satisfied that the 
prices previously paid remain a valid reference for comparison 
after considering the totality of other relevant factors such 
as time elapsed since prior purchase and any difference in 
quantities purchased or applicable terms and conditions.

 Section 853--Codification of Other Transaction Authority for Certain 
                           Prototype Projects

    This section would make permanent the other transactions 
authority (OTA) for contracting established in section 845 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 
(Public Law 103-160), as modified most recently by section 812 
of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-
291). This section would also make changes to the authority to 
use such contracting mechanisms to clarify that all 
participants to the contract be small business or 
nontraditional defense contractors, unless exceptional 
circumstances exist that require innovative business 
arrangements that are not feasible under another contract type.
    OTA has been an effective tool for research and development 
contracts, particularly for innovative organizations like the 
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. Due to the ability 
to tailor the contracting language and thus eliminating many 
aspects of the Federal acquisition regulations that may not be 
pertinent, OTA requires some discretion to allow for effective 
and seamless execution. The benefits of this flexibility have 
been recognized most recently by the Air Force, which would 
like to extensively rely on OTA contracting vehicles to more 
rapidly acquire information technology systems. The committee 
supports the Department of Defense in using flexible tools for 
its contracting and believes such permanence will give the 
Department additional confidence in the type of experimentation 
and organizational learning that is necessary if the Department 
is to remain competitive in the commercial marketplace. The 
committee will continue to review efforts utilizing such 
contracting mechanisms to prevent abuse or misuse by the 
Department.

       Section 854--Amendments to Certain Acquisition Thresholds

    This section would amend section 134 of title 41, United 
States Code, by raising the simplified acquisition threshold 
from $100,000 to $500,000. The committee is aware that section 
807 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375) requires an 
adjustment every 5 years of acquisition related thresholds for 
inflation, except for Davis-Bacon Act, Service Contract Act, 
and trade agreements thresholds, using the Consumer Price Index 
for all urban consumers. The committee notes that the current 
adjusted simplified acquisition threshold is $150,000. However, 
the committee believes changing the simplified acquisition 
threshold to $500,000 will further enable Federal agencies to 
buy products and services more quickly, more economically, and 
with a focus on small businesses.
    In order to maintain parity with other established 
thresholds, this section would also amend section 1902 of title 
41, United States Code, by raising the micro-purchase threshold 
from $3,000 to $5,000. Furthermore, this section would also 
amend section 1903 of title 41, United States Code, by raising 
the special emergency procurement authority threshold for 
purchases inside the United States from $250,000 to $750,000 
and raising the threshold for such authority for purchases 
outside the United States from $1.0 million to $1.5 million.
    Finally, this section would amend section 15(j)(1) of the 
Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644(j)(1)) by raising the small 
business reservation threshold from $100,000 to $500,000.

   Section 855--Revision of Method of Rounding When Making Inflation 
          Adjustment of Acquisition-Related Dollar Thresholds

    This section would amend section 1908(e)(2) of title 41, 
United States Code, to change the rounding method that is used 
when scheduled adjustments are made to certain acquisition-
related dollar thresholds, such as the simplified acquisition 
threshold. Specifically, this section would apply the rounding 
to the dollar threshold calculated after the adjustment is made 
based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for all-urban 
consumers. The current method rounds the value of the threshold 
on the day before the adjustment is calculated and then applies 
the adjustment based on CPI. Further, this section would 
provide additional guidance for rounding increments for 
acquisition-related thresholds that are $10.0 million or more 
up to more than $1.00 billion.
    The committee notes that section 1908 of title 41 provides 
for an inflation adjustment every 5 years of acquisition-
related dollar thresholds that are specified in law as a factor 
in defining the scope of the applicability of the policy, 
procedure, requirement, or restriction to the procurement of 
property or services by an executive agency, as determined by 
the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council. However, the 
committee is concerned that the current rounding procedures 
can, in some circumstances, lead to an inconsistent and 
inappropriate level of rounding.

 Section 856--Repeal of Requirement for Stand-Alone Manpower Estimates 
                 for Major Defense Acquisition Programs

    This section would consolidate the statutory requirement 
for a detailed manpower estimate prior to approval of 
development or production and deployment of a major defense 
acquisition program as established by section 2434 of title 10, 
United States Code, with the independent estimate of the full 
life-cycle cost of the program also required by section 2434.
    The committee notes that the planning, inventory, and 
reporting requirements of section 129a of title 10, United 
States Code, may also assist in fulfilling the intent of the 
requirement for manpower estimates for major defense 
acquisition programs, which is to ensure the life-cycle cost of 
the program, including sustainment, is considered early in the 
acquisition process and so personnel decisions and training 
requirements can be identified in time to take appropriate 
action.

    Section 857--Examination and Guidance Relating to Oversight and 
                     Approval of Services Contracts

    This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to complete an 
examination by March 1, 2016, of the decision authority related 
to acquisition of services and to develop and promulgate 
guidance to improve capabilities related to services contracts 
requirements development, source selection, and contract 
oversight and management.

Section 858--Streamlining of Requirements Relating to Defense Business 
                                Systems

    This section would revise section 2222 of title 10, United 
States Code, to clarify responsibilities for the management of 
defense business systems. As a result, this section would 
repeal the current reporting requirement contained in section 
2222 of title 10, United States Code, and insert a new annual 
reporting requirement through the year 2020 on the revised 
requirements of section 2222.

Section 859--Consideration of Strategic Materials in Preliminary Design 
                                 Review

    This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to ensure that 
Department of Defense Instruction 5000.02 and other applicable 
guidance receive full consideration during preliminary design 
review for strategic materials requirements over the life cycle 
of the product.

       Section 860--Procurement of Personal Protective Equipment

    This section would ensure the Secretary of Defense uses 
best value contracting methods to the maximum extent 
practicable when procuring an item of personal protective 
equipment.

     Section 861--Amendments Concerning Detection and Avoidance of 
                      Counterfeit Electronic Parts

    This section would amend section 818(c)(2)(B) of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public 
Law 112-81) to expand the eligibility for covered contractors 
to include costs associated with rework and corrective action 
related to counterfeit electronic parts as allowable costs 
under Department of Defense contracts.
    The committee expects that, not later than 180 days after 
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense 
will revise the Department of Defense Supplement to the Federal 
Acquisition Regulation to conform with the changes made by this 
section.

 Section 862--Revision to Duties of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Developmental Test and Evaluation and the Deputy Assistant 
              Secretary of Defense for Systems Engineering

    This section would amend section 139b of title 10, United 
States Code, to strengthen the authority of the Milestone 
Decision Authority (MDA) by clarifying that the Deputy 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Developmental Test and 
Evaluation and the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for 
Systems Engineering advise the MDA regarding review and 
approval of developmental test plans and systems engineering 
plans. Under existing statute, both these positions review and 
approve or disapprove those plans. The committee is proposing 
this change to streamline decision-making authority and 
strengthen accountability by ensuring that the MDA is fully 
responsible for determining whether a program is ready to 
proceed into the next phase of acquisition.

    Section 863--Extension of Limitation on Aggregate Annual Amount 
                    Available for Contract Services

    This section would amend section 808 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-
81), as most recently amended by section 813 of the Carl Levin 
and Howard P. Buck McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291), by extending for 1 
year the temporary limitation on the aggregate annual amounts 
available for contract services for the Department of Defense.

  Section 864--Use of Lowest Price, Technically Acceptable Evaluation 
      Method for Procurement of Audit or Audit Readiness Services

    This section would state a series of findings related to 
the use of the lowest price, technically acceptable (LPTA) 
evaluation method for the procurement of audit or audit 
readiness services. It would also require the Secretary of 
Defense to establish values and metrics for the services being 
procured and review the offeror's past performance before using 
an LPTA evaluation method for the procurement of such services.

      TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


               Improving Agility in Shaping the Workforce

    The committee believes that the Department of Defense 
should strive for balance when managing the total workforce in 
response to significant financial constraints. As such, the 
committee believes that, commensurate to military end strength 
reductions occurring in response to the Budget Control Act of 
2011 (Public Law 112-25) and to sequestration-level funding, 
reductions in Department of Defense civilian and contractor 
personnel should be part of a sensible approach to personnel 
management. However, the committee also believes that any 
personnel reductions should be done smartly and aim to retain 
high-performing personnel with the requisite talents, 
multidisciplinary knowledge, and up-to-date skills to help the 
Department remain agile in addressing the growing array of 
diverse threats facing the country and missions assigned to the 
Department.
    However, the committee notes that managing employee 
performance has been a longstanding Government-wide issue and 
the subject of numerous reforms since the beginning of the 
modern civil service. A February 2015 report by the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO-15-19) indicated that without 
effective performance management, agencies run the risk of 
losing or failing to utilize the skills of top performers, and 
also risk failing to recognize and correct or remove poor 
performers. The GAO also reported that even a small number of 
poor performers can negatively affect employee morale and the 
capacity of agencies to meet its mission requirements.
    The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has 
struggled in the past with building a system aimed at 
performance management. It recognizes the Department's 
continued focus on personnel management and supports the 
Department's ongoing efforts to improve its performance 
management system and appraisal process. However, in the 
current fiscal environment, the committee believes that the 
Department may need additional flexibility to manage the 
workforce. The committee seeks to provide the Secretary of 
Defense with the necessary authority and support to exercise 
such flexibility. The committee will continue working with the 
Department to enable it to make the tough decisions necessary 
for shaping and managing the workforce and to provide the 
Department with the tools necessary to recruit, hire, develop, 
and retain the best and brightest men and women to serve and 
support the Nation.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to brief the House Committee on Armed Services not later than 
June 30, 2015, on any legislative authority or regulatory 
policies in place that limit the Secretary of Defense's ability 
to appropriately balance the military, civilian, and contractor 
personnel within the Department. As part of this briefing, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide an 
evaluation of the Federal regulations governing the credit for 
performance that the Department uses in its determination of 
personnel retention standing, with a specific focus on how it 
impacts the Department's ability to retain high-quality 
personnel.

                           Productivity Goals

    The committee is aware that the Defense Business Board 
(DBB) completed the report ``Transforming Department of 
Defense's Core Business Processes for Revolutionary Change'' in 
January 2015. The review took a rigorous, data-driven view of 
Department of Defense business operations to help identify a 
potential for $125.0 billion in savings over the next 5 years. 
In its findings, the DBB identified several institutional 
reforms that could provide significant savings to the 
Department, including early retirements and reductions in 
service contractors. It also noted that key enablers to 
realizing those savings will be focused, concerted efforts to 
retain institutional memory, as well as addressing key 
technology obsolescence challenges.
    The committee believes that it is important to further 
explore the recommendations of the DBB's review in order for 
Congress to fully debate the merits, as well as the potential 
pitfalls, of each of the DBB's suggestions. Much like the push 
to achieve auditability, the committee believes that such 
institutional reform will be necessary to maximize productivity 
from the Department's funds so that ``saved'' dollars can be 
redirected to important training, readiness, and modernization 
challenges facing the warfighter.
    In particular, the committee believes that the Department 
should use the Defense Business Board's analysis of 
productivity goals as a valuable metric that should be 
institutionalized. Such productivity metrics may provide a more 
useful analytical measure of workload output than some goals 
that have traditionally been used by the Department, such as 
reductions in the number of personnel billets or reductions in 
funding levels. Not only will this be helpful to continue to 
inculcate an attitude of measurable efficiency in the culture 
of the workforce, but it will provide a useful analytic tool 
for making cost-benefit tradeoffs on workforce levels, 
facilities, and other areas of the budget traditionally 
considered overhead or support functions.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


    Section 901--Redesignation of the Department of the Navy as the 
                Department of the Navy and Marine Corps

    This section would redesignate the Department of the Navy 
as the Department of the Navy and Marine Corps, and change the 
title of its Secretary to the Secretary of the Navy and Marine 
Corps. This section would formally recognize the responsibility 
of the Office of the Secretary of the Navy over both the Navy 
and Marine Corps, and the Marine Corps' status as an equal 
partner with the Navy.

Section 902--Change of Period for Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff 
                   Review of the Unified Command Plan

    This section would amend section 161(b)(1) of title 10, 
United States Code, by modifying the requirement for the 
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to review the Unified 
Command Plan (UCP), including the missions, responsibilities, 
and force structure of each combatant command, from not less 
than every 2 years to not less than every 4 years. This 
modification would better align the UCP review with the Defense 
Strategy Review, required by section 118 of title 10, United 
States Code, as amended by the Carl Levin and Howard P. 
``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291).

  Section 903--Update of Statutory Specification of Functions of the 
     Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Relating to Joint Force 
                         Development Activities

    This section would amend section 153 of title 10, United 
States Code, relating to functions of the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff, to reflect additional joint force integration 
functions already overseen by the Chairman resulting from the 
disestablishment of United States Joint Forces Command on 
August 31, 2011, and the subsequent deletion of that command 
from the Unified Command Plan.

    Section 904--Sense of Congress on the United States Marine Corps

    This section would express a series of findings regarding 
the global security environment and the importance of the 
United States Marine Corps, as recognized by the 82nd Congress. 
This section would also express a sense of Congress reaffirming 
the Marine Corps' composition and functions as codified in 
section 5063 of title 10, United States Code, and reaffirming 
its responsibility as the nation's expeditionary, crisis 
response force.
    The committee notes that similar to the duties of the other 
military service chiefs, the Commandant of the Marine Corps is 
charged with significant responsibilities to organize, train, 
and equip Fleet Marine Forces of combined arms, together with 
supporting air components, for service with the fleet. The 
committee believes the Secretary of the Navy should recognize 
the particular interests of the Marine Corps and should 
continue to fully enable the Commandant to represent those 
interests in the same manner as the other military service 
chiefs.
    In this regard, the committee appreciates that particular 
care must be taken by the Secretary of the Navy to ensure that 
the Marine Corps, which has fewer personnel to devote to staff 
duty than the Navy, receives evenhanded treatment in 
organizing, manning, establishing work priorities, and 
otherwise structuring and operating within the consolidated 
Department of the Navy. The committee believes the Secretary's 
office, and those of the assistant secretaries, should include 
appropriate numbers of Marine generals and other Marine 
officers to ensure that the interests of the Marine Corps will 
be represented and that the Commandant will receive appropriate 
support from these offices. Finally, the committee also intends 
that the Headquarters, Marine Corps, shall have an appropriate 
share of the total number of general officers, other members of 
the Armed Forces, and civilian employees of the Department of 
the Navy for the Office of the Secretary of the Navy, the 
Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, and the Headquarters, 
Marine Corps.

Section 905--Additional Requirements for Streamlining of Department of 
                    Defense Management Headquarters

    This section would express a series of findings and the 
sense of Congress on the commitment of the Department of 
Defense to reduce its headquarters budgets and personnel by 20 
percent and to achieve $10.00 billion in cost savings over 5 
years. It would also amend section 904 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66), 
which requires the Secretary of Defense to develop a plan for 
streamlining Department of Defense management headquarters, by 
requiring an accurate baseline accounting of defense 
headquarters budgets and personnel, and more specific 
information on actual and planned reductions in management 
headquarters. In addition, this section would further modify 
section 904 of Public Law 113-66 to require the Department to 
implement its planned reduction in management headquarters 
budgets and personnel for certain organizations in the National 
Capital Region. Lastly, it would clarify that civilian 
employees funded from working-capital funds are not subject to 
the reduction requirement.
    The committee notes that the Department has already claimed 
the savings associated with these reductions in the budget 
requests provided since the 20 percent goal was established in 
2013. While the committee is interested in ensuring that true 
cost savings result from these efficiencies, the committee also 
desires to ensure that any reductions are taken in a manner 
that increase the performance, accountability, and agility of 
the Department. Moreover, the committee encourages the 
Department to take the actions necessary to establish accurate 
baselines and plans against which progress can be measured.

Section 906--Sense of Congress on Performance Management and Workforce 
                            Incentive System

    This section would express a series of findings on the 
efforts by the Department of Defense to institute a performance 
management and appraisal system for employees, named ``New 
Beginnings,'' as required by section 1113 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-
84). It would also express the sense of Congress that the 
Secretary of Defense should proceed with the collaborative work 
with employee representatives on the new system and implement 
it at the earliest possible date.

   Section 907--Guidelines for Conversion of Functions Performed by 
 Civilian or Contractor Personnel to Performance by Military Personnel

    This section would amend section 129a of title 10, United 
States Code, by adding a new section that establishes 
guidelines for the conversion of functions performed by 
civilian or contractor personnel to performance by military 
personnel.

                      TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                        Counter-Drug Activities


Counter-Drug Authority Regarding Support to Certain Foreign Governments

    The committee notes the importance of the counter-drug 
authority (the section ``1033'' authority), which allows the 
Department of Defense to provide equipment for the counter-drug 
activities of designated foreign governments. This authority 
originated in section 1033 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85) and, 
at the time, designated two South American governments as 
eligible to receive support with an annual funding cap of $9.0 
million. Since then, the number of designated countries 
eligible for support under this authority has grown to 39 
foreign governments over 4 continents, and the annual funding 
cap has grown to $125.0 million. This growth reflects the 
expanding reach and threat of drug traffickers and the 
globalization of transnational organized crime.
    The committee believes consideration should be given as to 
whether this authority should remain a country-by-country 
authority or become a global authority. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a 
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by February 
1, 2016, on the status of the section ``1033'' authority. The 
briefing should include an assessment of the following: the 
historical use of the authority and of the authority as it 
currently stands; the evolution of requirements behind the 
expansion of countries; the evolution of requirements behind 
the expansion of the funding cap; how countries and regions are 
prioritized; the advantages and disadvantages of a country-by-
country versus global authority; and the funding challenges 
associated with a country-by-country versus global authority. 
Finally, the Secretary is directed to make the briefing 
available, upon request, to the other congressional defense 
committees.

              Counternarcotics and Global Threats Strategy

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense is 
updating its Counternarcotics and Global Threats Strategy, 
which was last updated in 2011, to ensure that it has an up-to-
date strategy that meets current and emerging threats and 
security challenges.
    While the 2011 strategy effectively laid out the goals that 
the Department of Defense seeks to achieve, the committee is 
concerned that it did not articulate a sound strategy to 
achieve those goals. Given the growing demand for increasingly 
limited resources, the committee is interested in ensuring that 
the Department of Defense has specific strategic plans, which 
are country and regionally based, that utilize authorities and 
resources in an effective and sustainable way to achieve 
measurable goals.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to provide an addendum to the Department of Defense's 
Counternarcotics and Global Threats Strategy. The Department of 
Defense shall include the following components in its updated 
strategy:
    (1) An assessment of the historical use of counternarcotics 
authorities and how well-suited these authorities are to 
address current and emerging threats;
    (2) An analysis of the evolution of the expansion of the 
number of countries touched by each authority and what is 
driving the expansion;
    (3) An analysis of the authorities as they stand currently, 
while identifying strengths and weaknesses of each authority; 
and
    (4) An analysis of funding challenges.
    The strategy should also include specific plans for each 
country where counternarcotics authorities are utilized, as 
well as regional strategic plans. For both the country and 
regional plans, the strategy shall include the following:
    (1) Specific goals for each country and region and metrics 
to measure progress towards achieving each goal;
    (2) How each counternarcotics authority fits into each 
strategic plan and the limitations of each authority; and
    (3) How training and/or equipment provided under each 
authority provides a sustainable and lasting effect.
    The committee further directs the Secretary to provide the 
addendum to the Department of Defense's Counternarcotics and 
Global Threats Strategy to the Committees on Armed Services of 
the Senate and the House of Representatives upon completion of 
the strategy.

                  National Guard Counterdrug Programs

    The committee acknowledges the continued contributions of 
the National Guard to domestic counterdrug programs. The 
National Guard, working with law enforcement agencies and 
community-based organizations, performs interdiction and anti-
drug activities to counter illicit drug trafficking. It also 
operates regional counterdrug training centers across the 
country to provide education and training to local, State, and 
Federal law enforcement in counternarcotics and global threat 
reduction efforts.
    For the past 5 fiscal years, the budget request for 
National Guard Counterdrug Programs has not included sufficient 
funds to meet program requirements. Recognizing this shortfall 
in funding, Congress has consistently provided additional funds 
to enable the Guard to meet its requirements. However, this 
additional funding has been made available for execution by the 
Guard in the third or fourth quarter of the fiscal year, making 
it difficult for the Guard to execute it by the end of the 
fiscal year. The committee recognizes that this is not the most 
efficient or effective way to plan for and execute a successful 
program. The committee continues to encourage the Department of 
Defense to submit an accurate budget request for National Guard 
Counterdrug Programs consistent with its requirements.
    However, the committee also believes that, with appropriate 
planning, the National Guard should be able to obligate and 
expend additional funds, if made available, for its counterdrug 
programs even if received late in the fiscal year. Therefore, 
the committee directs the Chief of the National Guard Bureau to 
brief the House Committee on Armed Services, not later than 
October 1, 2015, on the Guard's plan for how it can improve its 
execution of additional funding should the program receive it.
    Lastly, as the tight fiscal environment continues, the 
committee continues to encourage the National Guard, in 
conjunction with the Secretary of Defense, to refine its 
priorities and missions.

                      Unaccompanied Alien Children

    In calendar year 2014, approximately 65,000 unaccompanied 
alien children (UAC) from Central America traveled through 
Mexico and crossed over the U.S. southern border. This number 
has grown exponentially over the past 3 years. In 2014, the 
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) was overwhelmed 
with the rate at which these children were crossing the border. 
At the request of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, 
the Secretary of Defense entered into a memorandum of 
understanding (MOU) with HHS to provide vacant facilities on 
Department of Defense installations to temporarily house up to 
7,700 children until they could be placed in the care of a 
relative or other sponsor while their immigration status was 
determined. The Department of Defense made available facilities 
at three military installations across the country and the 
committee acknowledges the efficiency with which the Department 
performed these tasks.
    The Department of Health and Human Services estimates that 
the number of UACs crossing the southern border in calendar 
year 2015 is expected to be similar to 2014. In February 2015, 
HHS and the Department of Defense entered into a second MOU for 
continued Department of Defense support, if the need arises, to 
house UACs while they are being processed and placed. The 
committee commends the interagency for its cooperation on this 
matter but also recognizes the need for the Department of 
Defense to maintain its readiness and support its primary 
missions. The committee recognizes the efforts of the 
Department of Defense, in its calendar year 2014 review of 
facilities capable of housing UACs, to coordinate with 
installation commanders to ensure that the use of facilities in 
support of HHS would not disrupt scheduled facility 
maintenance, training activities, or military operations.
    The committee encourages both the Departments of Defense 
and HHS to be as transparent as possible and to improve 
communications with communities and Congress when a facility is 
being considered for use. The committee believes the Secretary 
of Defense should evaluate many factors when determining which 
facilities can be made available to support HHS under the MOU. 
The committee expects that any Department of Defense assistance 
to HHS should not impact any scheduled maintenance, training, 
housing plans, or exercises to be executed by the Department 
during calendar year 2015.

                Western Hemisphere Maritime Intelligence

    The committee notes that the U.S. Navy has reduced its 
maritime security operations in the Western Hemisphere and, as 
a result, the U.S. Coast Guard has been increasingly relied 
upon to conduct such operations. However, neither the Navy nor 
Coast Guard have sufficient assets or capabilities in the 
Western Hemisphere to provide accurate and timely maritime 
intelligence information to support these operations.
    The committee believes that the unique assets of the 
Department of Defense, specifically those operated by U.S. 
Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) and U.S. Northern Command 
(NORTHCOM), may be able to provide this intelligence 
information, but the committee lacks a full understanding of 
the maritime security intelligence gaps in the Western 
Hemisphere, the specific intelligence, surveillance and 
reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities that could be brought to bear 
against these gaps, and the options for improving intelligence 
sharing with the Coast Guard.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, 
in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, to 
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not 
later than October 1, 2015, on the following:
    (1) The maritime intelligence requirements in the Western 
Hemisphere and the extent to which they are being fulfilled or 
planned to be fulfilled;
    (2) An assessment of ISR assets and capabilities that 
NORTHCOM and SOUTHCOM could employ to fulfill unmet 
requirements;
    (3) Options for how to improve maritime intelligence 
sharing with the Coast Guard to assist with maritime security 
operations; and
    (4) The planned U.S. Navy presence in the SOUTHCOM area of 
responsibility in fiscal year 2016 and fiscal year 2017.

                             Other Matters


                  Adequacy of Support Assets for Asia

    The committee notes that in his January 2012 Defense 
Strategic Guidance, the President announced that while the U.S. 
military would continue to contribute to security globally, it 
would of necessity rebalance toward the Asia-Pacific region 
since U.S. economic and security interests were inextricably 
linked to development in the region. Further, the Defense 
Strategic Guidance stated that the maintenance of peace, 
stability, the free flow of commerce, and U.S. influence in the 
Asia-Pacific region would depend in part on an underlying 
balance of military capability and presence.
    In light of the direction provided by the Defense Strategic 
Guidance, the March 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) 
posited that the United States will maintain a robust footprint 
in Northeast Asia while enhancing U.S. presence in, Southeast 
Asia, and the Indian Ocean. Specifically, the QDR called for 60 
percent of U.S. Navy assets to be stationed in the Pacific by 
2020; an increase in the size of Navy, Air Force, and Marine 
contingents on Guam; an increased U.S. military presence in 
Australia; and the maintenance of a viable, substantial U.S. 
Army presence on the Korean peninsula and in Northeast Asia. 
Finally, in February 2014, the President underscored the 
country's continued commitment to rebalancing the U.S. military 
toward the Asia-Pacific region in his National Security 
Strategy, while also noting that the security dynamics of the 
region, including contested maritime territorial claims and a 
provocative North Korea, risk escalation and conflict.
    The committee also notes that this rebalancing follows 
almost 70 years of United States primary strategic focus on 
defense of Western Europe and almost 13 years of conflict in 
Iraq and Afghanistan that have, in large measure, eroded the 
U.S. military's ability to conduct full-spectrum operations. 
Moreover, this rebalancing will occur in a period of increasing 
fiscal constraint. Nevertheless, in order to support the 
rebalance to Asia and the Pacific, it is important that U.S. 
Pacific Command and its subordinate commands have access to the 
correct mix of support assets, especially given the vast 
distances that define the theater as well as the range of 
potential threats in the theater.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
of the United States to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees by April 30, 2016, that evaluates the 
Department of Defense's support capabilities for current and 
future operations in the Asia-Pacific region, including an 
assessment of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the Department of Defense has 
identified support asset requirements, including related 
funding needs, to enable current and future operations in the 
region. Such support assets could include, but are not limited 
to, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; sea and air 
lift; command and control; logistical sustainment; pre-
positioned stocks; and any other assets commanders in the 
region think necessary for the accomplishment of missions 
across the range of military operations;
    (2) The adequacy of the existing support assets to meet 
operational requirements given the enlarged U.S. presence in 
the region; and
    (3) Any other issues the Comptroller General determines 
appropriate with respect to support capabilities in the Asia-
Pacific Region.
    The committee further directs the Comptroller General to 
brief the House Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 2016, 
on the Comptroller General's preliminary findings.

          Attendance at Professional and Technical Conferences

    The committee is concerned that many organizations within 
the Department of Defense have either eliminated or severely 
restricted temporary duty travel for professional and technical 
conferences. While the committee supports efforts to reduce 
non-essential costs, the committee believes such conferences 
provide value by enabling Department of Defense engineers, 
scientists, and other technical personnel to share research, 
learn about cutting-edge innovations, and interact with their 
peers from across the country and the world. Furthermore, the 
committee recognizes that the formal presentation of one's own 
research to the broader technical community is often a 
requisite for professional advancement within that technical 
community.
    The committee is aware that in a February 2014 memorandum, 
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 
Logistics directed the Secretaries of the military departments, 
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and 
Engineering, and the directors of the defense science and 
technology agencies to ``give appropriate consideration to the 
importance of attendance at technical symposia and conferences 
that enhance communication between Department of Defense 
acquisition professionals and their industry counterparts.'' 
The memo went further to provide the Under Secretary's 
``support [for] properly justified attendance by Department of 
Defense personnel to the extent possible, subject to the 
availability of resources, including travel funds.''
    The committee supports the Under Secretary's guidance on 
this matter but is concerned that the lengthy and complex 
approval processes to enable conference attendance by Federal 
employees is unduly hampering the ability of academic and 
scientific personnel in the Department of Defense to perform 
their jobs, may inhibit career progression, and could 
discourage personnel with highly technical skills and 
competencies from entering the workforce.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to examine the Department of Defense policies related to 
professional travel and to brief the House Committee on Armed 
Services not later than October 1, 2015, on findings and 
recommendations necessary to further enable professional 
development of the workforce.

            Comptroller General Review of Drawdown Authority

    Since 1961, the President has had special authority to 
order the ``drawdown'' of defense articles and other services 
or military education and training from the Department of 
Defense and military service inventories and transfer them to 
foreign countries or international organizations. This 
authority, as outlined in section 506 of the Foreign Assistance 
Act of 1961 (Public Law 87-195), as amended, allows the 
President to provide this assistance without first seeking 
additional authority or appropriations from Congress.
    The committee has observed what appears to be an increasing 
use of such authority in recent years to provide defense 
articles and services to such countries as Ukraine, the 
Republic of Iraq, the French Republic (for its operations in 
the Republic of Mali), and those supporting the African Union-
led Central African Republic International Support Mission. 
While the committee does not dispute the merits of providing 
defense articles and services to such countries, it is 
concerned about the use of such authority as a way to 
circumvent Congress and the impact it may have on U.S. military 
stockpiles and readiness.
    The committee notes that the Government Accountability 
Office last examined this issue in 2002, as required by the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public 
Law 107-107). Its 2002 report (GAO-02-1027) noted that 
drawdowns had been used with greater frequency and that the 
Department was unable to systemically track and accurately 
report to Congress on the status of these drawdowns. The 
committee believes that an updated examination of the drawdown 
authority is warranted, including whether the use of the 
authority is achieving its intended purposes, and the impact, 
if any, on U.S. defense inventories (military stockpiles and 
readiness), as well as U.S. Government resources.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to conduct a review of drawdown authority and 
submit a report to the congressional defense committees, the 
Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, 
and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, not later 
than December 8, 2015, to include the following:
    (1) To what extent has the authority to drawdown U.S. 
defense inventories been utilized to assist foreign countries 
or international organizations in addressing security threats, 
and what parameters were used to determine whether to provide 
assistance through this special drawdown authority or other 
security assistance authorities;
    (2) The types of requirements that were met through this 
assistance, including the extent to which U.S. assistance 
provided through inventory drawdowns supported U.S. efforts to 
build partner capacity and supported the efforts of other 
nations to undertake operations that are in the U.S. interest;
    (3) To what extent the executive branch has managed this 
drawdown authority to ensure that it is used appropriately, 
including the extent to which other authorities are considered 
and duplication of other U.S. or international efforts is 
minimized; and
    (4) To what extent have drawdowns affected the readiness of 
the military services, to specifically include whether such 
drawdowns reduce the availability of defense articles (e.g., 
weapon systems) and spare parts needed for the military 
services to complete their missions; require the use of 
operation and maintenance funds to support drawdowns (e.g., 
refurbishing or repairing items and providing spare parts); and 
to what extent mechanisms exist for the military services to 
provide input regarding potential effects on readiness when 
decisions regarding drawdowns are under consideration.

         Comptroller General Review of Homeland Response Forces

    The National Guard has completed fielding 10 regionally 
aligned Homeland Response Forces to assist civil authorities in 
responding to disasters, including Chemical, Biological, 
Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosives (CBRNE) incidents. The 
Homeland Response Forces are also meant to serve as a bridge 
between initial National Guard response to an incident and the 
arrival of assistance from Federal military forces. Each 
Homeland Response Force is designed to provide life-saving, 
command and control, and security capabilities and is expected 
to plan, train, and exercise within its designated region with 
the goal of establishing links between local, State, and 
Federal authorities. Previous Government Accountability Office 
work identified personnel, training, equipment, and command and 
control challenges with related National Guard response forces 
that could materially affect the preparedness or operational 
effectiveness of the Homeland Response Forces.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to assess the preparedness of the Homeland Response 
Forces to accomplish their mission. The Comptroller General 
should provide a briefing on preliminary results of the 
assessment to the House Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 
2016. The assessment should address the following:
    (1) The current state of readiness of each Homeland 
Response Force with respect to personnel, training, and 
equipment on hand, and their capability to respond to CBRNE 
events.
    (2) The extent to which the Department of Defense has 
integrated the Homeland Response Forces operationally with 
other Federal and State-level response forces, including the 
National Guard's Civil Support Teams and CBRNE Enhanced 
Response Force Packages, and the Defense CBRNE Force.
    (3) Any related matters the Comptroller General finds 
appropriate.
    The committee further directs the Comptroller General to 
provide the Comptroller General's final results to the House 
Committee on Armed Services at a subsequent date and format to 
be agreed upon at the time of briefing.

     Comptroller General Review of Pandemic Civil Support Planning

    Planning activities across Federal Government agencies, 
including the Department of Defense, are key to responding to a 
potential outbreak in the United States of a pandemic disease. 
The Federal Government anticipates an influenza pandemic would 
occur in multiple waves over a period of time, rather than as a 
discrete event. During the peak weeks of an outbreak of a 
severe influenza pandemic, an estimated 40 percent of the U.S. 
workforce may not be at work due to illness, the need to care 
for family members who are sick, or fear of infection.
    The Department of Defense would play a key role in 
responding to a domestic outbreak of a pandemic disease by 
supporting domestic civil authorities in accordance with the 
National Response Framework. Coordination with Federal, State, 
local, tribal, and territorial authorities, as well as private 
sector partners, to plan, train, and exercise a coordinated 
response may prove essential. This coordination and support 
would be complicated, because a large number of Department of 
Defense personnel could potentially be affected by an influenza 
pandemic, which could adversely affect the military's 
readiness.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to review the Department of Defense's planning to 
support civil authorities in the event of a pandemic disease 
outbreak and to brief the House Committee on Armed Services by 
March 31, 2016, on the preliminary results. The review should 
address the following:
    (1) To what extent has the Department of Defense planned 
for supporting civil authorities in the event of a domestic 
outbreak of a pandemic disease?
    (2) To what extent has the Department of Defense 
coordinated with Federal, State, local, tribal, and territorial 
authorities, and the private sector, in preparation for a 
domestic outbreak of a pandemic disease?
    (3) To what extent has the Department of Defense conducted 
or participated in training exercises with civil authorities 
and private sector emergency medical response teams in 
preparation for a domestic outbreak of a pandemic disease?
    (4) Any related matters the Comptroller General finds 
appropriate.
    The committee further directs the Comptroller General to 
provide the Comptroller General's final results to the House 
Committee on Armed Services at a subsequent date and format to 
be agreed upon at the time of briefing.

Comptroller General Review of Transferring Improvised Explosive Device 
   Knowledge and Technology Gained by Department of Defense to Civil 
                              Authorities

    The committee is aware that the Comptroller General of the 
United States is conducting a review of Federal Government 
coordination efforts to counter improvised explosive devices 
(IEDs) in the United States.
    The committee encourages the Comptroller General to 
continue this review and to include within its analysis a 
review of Department of Defense support to civil authorities 
for counter-IED activities. The committee believes that there 
are considerable amounts of expertise, technologies, and 
capabilities resident within the Department of Defense for the 
counter-IED mission that could now be leveraged for domestic 
use and to assist Federal, State, and local authorities charged 
with counter-IED missions.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to provide a briefing to the House Committee 
on Armed Services by July 30, 2015, on the status of the 
ongoing review of Federal Government coordination efforts to 
counter improvised explosive devices in the United States.

   Congressional Review of Federal Acquisition Regulation Rulemaking

    The committee is concerned about the often lengthy 
rulemaking process associated with the Federal Acquisition 
Regulation (FAR). The FAR Operating Guide, which details the 
process, states that the standard timeline for FAR cases is 16 
months from the time a report is submitted with a draft 
proposed or interim rule to the final publication of the rule. 
A variety of stakeholders have expressed concerns to the 
committee that the FAR Council often fails to publish these 
rules in a timely manner or even meet this standard 16 month 
timeline goal.
    The committee is aware that the FAR rulemaking process is 
unique in that it does not follow the typical Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) processes. Such 
rulemaking begins by going through the FAR Council process, 
which includes several layers of approval that include the 
Defense Acquisition Regulatory Council (DARC), Civilian Agency 
Acquisition Council (CAAC), General Services Administration 
(GSA), Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP), and OIRA. 
After the FAR Council process, rules are then sent for a final 
check through the OIRA clearance process before publication as 
a final rule. The committee notes that the FAR Council, CAAC, 
and DARC all have members representing various agencies and are 
all expected to reach consensus on these rules, which can be 
very complex.
    The committee believes that the FAR rulemaking process 
should be reviewed with the goals of improving the timeliness 
of this process and identifying efficiencies which could 
improve the process. Therefore, the committee directs the 
Administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy to 
conduct such a review and provide a briefing to House Committee 
on Armed Services and the House Committee on Oversight and 
Government Reform not later than September 30, 2015, on the 
findings of the review. The briefing should include 
recommendations for improving the FAR rulemaking process.

              Counter Threat Financing and Analytic Tools

    The committee recognizes that illicit financial networks 
are critical enablers to destabilizing networks and 
transnational criminal organizations, including terrorist, 
narco-traffickers, human smugglers, proliferators and actors 
seeking to avoid sanctions. The Department of Defense invested 
heavily in the Republic of Iraq and the Islamic Republic of 
Afghanistan to create counter threat finance capabilities to 
detect and combat such illicit activity.
    With the draw-down in Afghanistan and the pivot to Asia, 
the committee is concerned that budget constraints may result 
in divestiture of such counter-threat finance capabilities in 
favor of traditional military capabilities. However, the 
committee believes such capabilities will continue to be of 
value to combat threats to our national security, including 
state actors avoiding sanctions or maintaining black market 
economic activities. The committee also believes such 
capabilities can be useful in supporting surveillance and 
indications and warning for national economic threats, such as 
attempts to perpetrate economic warfare or sabotage. Therefore, 
the committee urges the Secretary of Defense to continue to 
sustain Department of Defense counter-threat finance programs 
and capabilities as planned.

                     Defense Innovation Initiative

    In November 2014, the Secretary of Defense announced the 
Defense Innovation Initiative (DII) as a department-wide effort 
to develop ``game changing'' technologies, new operating 
concepts, and more innovative leaders to ``maintain and advance 
the competitive advantage of America and its military allies.'' 
The Secretary also announced, as part of this Initiative, the 
development of a third offset strategy, a new Long-Range 
Research and Development Planning Program, and a new Advanced 
Capability and Deterrence Panel.
    Since then, DII and its related efforts have been cited by 
senior Department of Defense officials in speeches and 
referenced in the Department's fiscal year 2016 budget request 
documentation. However, despite repeated requests for 
information, the Department has provided little detail on DII 
and its related efforts to the committee. While the speeches 
and budget documentation suggest these could be promising 
efforts, the committee is unable to oversee and assess their 
merits because it lacks detailed information from the 
Department.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to provide the House Committee on Armed Services with a 
briefing on the Defense Innovation Initiative and its related 
efforts not later than July 30, 2015. The briefing should 
include a discussion of the objectives of and plans for DII and 
its related efforts, how such efforts interrelate, and the 
organizations involved.

                            Defense Strategy

    The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense's 
assessment of the security environment shapes its decisions on 
geographic and mission priorities, force sizing, and posture. 
The committee notes that the security environment has changed 
considerably since the Department of Defense released its 
Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) in early 2014. Although the 
Department recognizes that the security environment is 
``growing more volatile'' and ``unpredictable'' with an 
expanding array of potential threats, the committee questions 
whether certain assumptions about the security environment 
contained in the QDR remain valid and therefore, whether the 
defense strategy contained in the QDR remains viable.
    Most notably, the rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and the 
Levant, growing instability across the Middle East and Africa, 
and a revanchist Russian Federation, led the bipartisan 
National Defense Panel (NDP), in its July 2014 report, to call 
for a ``reevaluation of U.S. military posture in this critical 
region [the Middle East],'' and to ``no longer simply assume 
that Europe will be a net security provider. Europe will 
require more attention and a higher sense of priority from U.S. 
defense planners.'' Furthermore, the NDP recommended that, 
``given the worsening threat environment, we believe a more 
expansive force sizing construct . . . is appropriate.''
    The committee believes that the Department should revisit 
the assumptions underpinning its defense strategy and make 
adjustments to the strategy as necessary. Furthermore, the 
committee urges caution as the Department contemplates any 
force sizing and posture changes as it recognizes that, once 
implemented, such changes are difficult to reverse.

              Department of Defense Installation Security

    Since the tragic events at Fort Hood, the Washington Navy 
Yard, and the USS Mahan, the Department of Defense has 
conducted several reviews of its programs, policies, and 
procedures to improve security at military installations. The 
committee notes that the Secretary of Defense provided the 
committee a briefing on the Department of Defense and military 
departments' efforts related to physical access controls, 
physical security infrastructure capabilities, and force 
protection systems as directed by the committee report (H. 
Rept. 113-446) accompanying the Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015. The 
committee also notes that other reports have been requested by 
Congress related to installation security, including the 
committee report (S. Rept. 113-211) accompanying the Defense 
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2015, the committee report 
(S. Rept. 113-176) accompanying the Carl Levin National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015, and the Joint 
Explanatory Statement (Committee Print No. 4) accompanying the 
Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015. While the committee 
recognizes efforts to improve the programs, policies, 
procedures, and infrastructure supporting the physical security 
of military installations, the committee believes that 
continued emphasis is needed. The committee looks forward to 
receiving the additional reports directed by Congress on 
installation security and conducting oversight of the current 
programs and future initiatives in the areas of physical access 
control systems, physical security infrastructure capabilities, 
and force protection aimed at enhancing the security of 
military installations.

                    Electromagnetic Spectrum Roadmap

    The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has 
been examining ways to better utilize the electromagnetic 
spectrum (EMS) in the future. Spectrum is a finite resource 
that provides necessary capabilities for both the Federal 
sector, including the military and national security 
establishment, and commercial interests. As noted by the 
President's Council of Advisers for Science and Technology in 
2012, ``If the Nation instead expands its options for managing 
Federal spectrum, we can transform the availability of a 
precious national resource--spectrum--from scarcity to 
abundance . . . The essential element of this new Federal 
spectrum architecture is that the norm for spectrum use should 
be sharing, not exclusivity.''
    The committee recognizes the significant effort that the 
Department of Defense has made to improve its responsiveness to 
changes in the technological and regulatory environment. For 
example, the Department issued an Electromagnetic Spectrum 
Strategy in February 2014 to address how the Department will 
manage increased spectrum access risks, develop more effective 
solutions, and focus on technological innovation and sharing. 
That has led to an EMS Roadmap and Action Plan that is expected 
to be issued in the coming months, which would implement the 
goals and objectives of the EMS Strategy, and address 
everything from systems acquisitions to operations to spectrum 
management policy. The committee looks forward to seeing the 
results of this roadmap, including how it will leverage the 
government-industry-academia partnership of the National 
Spectrum Consortium to bring together stakeholders, and the S&T 
Roadmap, which is developing a technology roadmap for ensuring 
a spectrally efficient and dynamic system in the future.

                  Foreign Currency Fluctuation Account

    The General Accounting Office (now the Government 
Accountability Office, or GAO) noted in a 1986 report (NSIAD-
86-173) that the purpose of the Foreign Currency Fluctuation, 
Defense (FCF,D) account is to provide a mechanism for 
stabilizing the portion of operation and maintenance (O&M) and 
Military Personnel funding used for purchasing foreign goods 
and services. The FCF,D provides funds to O&M when foreign 
exchange rates are unfavorable (when losses occur) and receives 
funds from O&M when the rates are favorable (when gains occur). 
This ensures, as GAO stated, that ``any given O&M appropriation 
for the purchase of foreign goods and services will purchase 
the budgeted amount of goods and services, regardless of the 
gains and losses of the dollar caused by currency 
fluctuations.'' Based on the rationale for the genesis of the 
FCF,D account, the committee believes that when foreign 
currency rates are determined by the Department of Defense, the 
current balance of funds in the FCF,D account should be 
considered.
    When the FCF,D account has a balance close to or at the cap 
of $970.0 million, the committee believes the budgeted rates 
should be adjusted to generate losses within the account, 
thereby drawing down the FCF,D account balance. This would 
reduce the O&M budget requirement for foreign goods and 
services, allowing excess funds to be allocated to other 
readiness programs without changing the budget topline. 
However, as the FCF,D account realizes a net gain, these gains 
remain in O&M and are used for purposes not originally 
requested in the annual budget submission to Congress. Without 
visibility on these transactions through a reprogramming 
request, the committee cannot determine whether funds remaining 
in the FCF,D account are being used to reduce current readiness 
shortfalls.
    The committee notes that GAO estimates the O&M accounts 
will realize a net gain of $587.4 million and the Military 
Personnel accounts will realize a net gain of $304.0 million in 
fiscal year 2016 when comparing the rates used to develop 
fiscal 2016 budgetary needs to cover foreign currency 
fluctuations with projected needs based on current exchange 
rates.
    In the committee report (H. Rept. 113-446) accompanying the 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015, the committee recommended the Department 
of Defense take into consideration the current balance within 
the FCF,D account when determining foreign currency levels in 
upcoming budget submissions. The committee observes there has 
been no such change to how foreign currency rates are 
calculated. Accordingly, the committee recommends both a 
reduction in the O&M budget for fiscal year 2016 as shown in 
section 4301 of this Act and a reduction in the Military 
Personnel budget for fiscal year 2016 as shown in section 4401 
of this Act, and realigns those funds to support higher 
priority defense requirements throughout the Department.

    Importance of the Department of Defense Meeting Audit Deadlines

    The committee stresses the importance of the Department of 
Defense's financial management and audit efforts, and notes 
that the Department has 2 fiscal years remaining to complete 
its audit readiness work in preparation for meeting its goal of 
full financial statement auditability by September 30, 2017.
    However, the committee is concerned about the capability 
and capacity of the Defense Finance and Accounting Service 
(DFAS) to fully support the financial requirements of the 
Department and the military services. For example, the 
Department of Defense Inspector General recently withdrew its 
audit opinion of the U.S. Marine Corps fiscal year 2012 
financial statements due to DFAS's failure to properly maintain 
its suspense accounts. The committee is further concerned that, 
absent near-term corrective actions by DFAS, the Department and 
the military services may be at risk of failing to achieve 
their audit readiness objectives by September 2017.
    The committee also believes that it is important for the 
Department to continue hiring qualified financial management 
personnel, including certified public accountants, to address 
these challenges. The committee further believes that the 
military services should have greater influence in the DFAS 
process for selecting independent public auditors for the 
military services, and that communications between the military 
services and DFAS must be improved to ensure that the services' 
financial requirements are better understood by DFAS.
    Lastly, the committee urges the Secretary of Defense, the 
Deputy Secretary of Defense, and the Under Secretary of Defense 
(Comptroller) to continue prioritizing the Department's 
Financial Improvement and Audit Readiness plan, and continues 
to emphasize the need for the Department to improve its 
accountability for how defense dollars are spent.

     Navy's Proposed Transition to an Evolved Contracting Strategy

    The Department of the Navy has briefed the congressional 
defense committees on an ``evolved contracting strategy'' to 
change the existing contracting methodology to procure non-
nuclear surface ship maintenance and modernization, a critical 
function in the readiness-generation process. The committee 
notes that this change would generally, with some exceptions 
for emergent repairs, move the overall ship repair vehicle from 
a cost-plus type contract to fixed-price.
    The Comptroller General of the United States in the March 
17, 1982, report ``Actions Needed to Reduce Schedule Slippages 
and Cost Growth on Contracts for Navy Ship Overhauls (PLRD-82-
29)'' found that ``overhauls were delayed an average of 64 days 
and that contract cost growth over the award price was 
averaging about 62 percent for frigates, 55 percent for 
auxiliary ships, and 29 percent for amphibious ships.'' The 
Comptroller General also indicated that ``contract cost growth 
is of special concern because contract additives are price-
based on sole-source negotiation with the enterprise awarded 
the basic contract. Under these conditions, the Navy is at a 
great disadvantage in trying to assure that the best price is 
being negotiated with the contractor. Furthermore, contract 
changes often contribute to overhaul delays.'' The committee 
believes that the Comptroller General's concerns of March 1982 
may be applicable to the ``evolved contracting strategy'' that 
the Navy is planning to implement in the near future. 
Specifically, the committee is concerned these contracting 
methodology changes could induce availability delays and cost 
growth, especially as change orders are identified and 
adjudicated between the Navy and industry.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees by March 1, 2016, on the risks and benefits 
of the proposed ``evolved contracting strategy'' to include the 
following aspects of ship material readiness:
    (1) The ability of the evolved contracting strategy to 
reduce availability costs, shorten schedule, and improve 
quality;
    (2) The ability of third-party advance planning for ship 
repair availabilities to develop stable, well-defined 
requirements;
    (3) The stability and viability of the ship repair 
industrial base, including the ability to invest in and retain 
critically skilled workers and safe, efficient facilities and 
to provide insight and continuity across the industrial base;
    (4) The ability of the Navy to retain ships in their 
respective homeport locations during availabilities and the 
applicability of section 7299a of title 10, United States Code, 
and Secretary of the Navy ``Ship Depot Maintenance Solicitation 
Policy'' memorandum dated June 16, 1995;
    (5) The opportunities for small-business participation and 
for industry teaming within the ship repair industrial base;
    (6) The ability to support the Navy in meeting service-life 
objectives for non-nuclear surface ships; and
    (7) The ability to meet operational availability 
requirements of the Navy Optimized Fleet Response Plan.
    (8) The extent to which Navy installation and personnel 
security protocols, procedures, and policies have been 
streamlined to minimize impacts to contract personnel 
supporting Navy sustainment while meeting force protection 
requirements.

Notifications of Changes to the Defense Federal Acquisition Supplement 
                              to Congress

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense 
maintains a well-established and actively maintained website 
and also uses other electronic media to provide timely 
publication notices of changes to the Defense Federal 
Acquisition Supplement. However, the committee continues to 
also receive hard copies of these publication notices. The 
committee believes that, should the Department continue to 
actively maintain a publicly available website, and 
sufficiently archive the notices, there is no need for hard 
copies of the notices to also be provided to the committee. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to review current 
processes and, in coordination with the congressional defense 
committees, take such steps as necessary to streamline the 
delivery of publication notices to Congress not later than 
March 1, 2016.

                   Pacific Command Operational Plans

    The committee is aware that the Department of Defense is 
updating many of its operational and contingency plans, 
including those within the U.S. Pacific Command's (PACOM) area 
of responsibility. The committee seeks a greater understanding 
of the factors driving the changes in these plans and the 
implications for PACOM's posture, force structure, and 
capability requirements, so that it can better assess the 
alignment of requirements and resources within the Department.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Commander of U.S. 
Pacific Command to brief the House Committee on Armed Services 
not later than September 30, 2015, on the factors influencing 
and the implications of the updates to PACOM's operational and 
contingency plans. Specifically, the briefing shall include a 
discussion of the following:
    (1) Changes in assumptions related to the threat and 
strategic environment;
    (2) Changes in assumptions related to Department-wide 
policy, strategy, and defense planning guidance;
    (3) Changes in strategic theater objectives; and
    (4) The implications for the posture, force structure, and 
capability requirements of the U.S Armed Forces within the 
PACOM area of responsibility (AOR) and for U.S. forces outside 
of the AOR that would be required to support the execution of 
plans.

    Proposed Retirement of Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron 84 and 85 
                                Aircraft

    The committee is aware that the Department of the Navy 
plans to retire Helicopter Sea Squadron (HSC) 84 and 85 
aircraft beginning in the third quarter of fiscal year 2015. 
These aircraft are currently providing organic and inherent 
special operations-peculiar rotary wing capabilities to Naval 
Special Warfare training and operational components, and 
Theater Special Operations Commands within U.S. Central Command 
and U.S. Pacific Command.
    The committee understands that the retirement of these 
aircraft could cause a considerable capability gap particularly 
for maritime interception operations, personnel recovery, 
helicopter visit, board, search and seizure (HVBSS) operations, 
and the countering weapons of mass destruction mission sets. As 
such, Naval Special Warfare Command expects a major degradation 
in capability and readiness for its forward deployed crisis 
response units.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to brief the House Committee on Armed Services by July 30, 
2015, on the planned retirement of HSC-84 and 85. The briefing 
should include but not be limited to: plans for retirement of 
HSC-84 and 85 including any cost-benefit analyses conducted to 
justify retirement; plans to field replacement capabilities to 
meet all operational requirements including special operations-
peculiar requirements of the geographic combatant commanders 
and U.S. Special Operations Command; capability gaps and 
limitations identified as a result of the potential retirement; 
any other matters deemed appropriate by the Secretary of 
Defense.

               Recreational Off-Highway Vehicle Briefing

    The committee understands the Consumer Product Safety 
Commission (CPSC) has proposed more restrictive vehicle 
handling requirements for recreational off-highway vehicles 
(ROVs). The committee notes the military services procure ROVs 
in limited quantities for specific military applications and 
missions, and further notes these new regulations may have 
potential impacts on current Department of Defense ROV 
programs. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to brief the House Committee on Armed Services by 
September 9, 2015 on the potential implications and impacts 
these new vehicle handling requirements posed by the CPSC could 
have on current Department ROV programs.

    Strategic Vision and Plan for an Effective Global Response Force

    The committee directs the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff to submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed 
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services within 180 
days of enactment, on the strategic vision and plan for an 
adequately resourced, trained, equipped, and manned effective 
global response force (GRF). This report shall be submitted in 
unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.
    The committee believes that the GRF is a top priority and 
having a fully resourced and supported GRF is critical to our 
national security if ever needed. The committee strongly 
believes that the GRF can serve the purpose of deterrence and 
provide leverage in diplomatic negotiations. This was 
reinforced by Secretary Carter, who stated the GRF has the 
greatest deterrent value because of its global reach during his 
testimony to the House Committee on Armed Services on ``The 
President's proposed Authorization for the Use of Military 
Force against ISIL and the Fiscal Year 2016 National Defense 
Authorization Budget Request from the Department of Defense.''
    The committee directs that the Chairman of the Joints 
Chiefs of Staff shall include in his report: a description of 
current operational requirements and capability gaps for an 
effective global response force to ensure that a fully 
developed joint operational concept emerges that supports the 
National Military Strategy; a description of any shortfalls in 
joint capacity; an assessment of the ability of the Department 
of Defense to meet current global response force requirements; 
an assessment whether each of the military departments is 
meeting expectations with respect to the global response force; 
a discussion of what each of the military departments is doing 
to address any concerns; an assessment of all supporting 
elements of the global response force, including special 
operations, air defense, capability to conduct logistical 
resupply, follow-on forces, and other elements the Chairman 
determines appropriate; and an assessment of the current 
capacity and readiness of aircraft lift and maritime ships to 
transport the global response force and additional forces in 
support of war plans, including a description of how readiness 
maneuverability and frequency in which maneuverability capacity 
is assessed.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                     Subtitle A--Financial Matters


                Section 1001--General Transfer Authority

    This section would allow the Secretary of Defense, with 
certain limitations, to make transfers between amounts 
authorized for fiscal year 2016 in division A of this Act. This 
section would limit the total amount transferred under this 
authority to $5.0 billion. This section would also require 
prompt notification to Congress of each transfer made.

   Section 1002--Authority to Transfer Funds to the National Nuclear 
 Security Administration to Sustain Nuclear Weapons Modernization and 
                             Naval Reactors

    This section would provide the Secretary of Defense the 
authority to transfer up to $150.0 million to the nuclear 
weapons and naval reactor programs of the National Nuclear 
Security Administration (NNSA) if the amount authorized to be 
appropriated or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 
for the weapons activities of the NNSA is less than $8.9 
billion (the amount specified for fiscal year 2016 in the 
report required by section 1251 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84)).

 Section 1003--Accounting Standards to Value Certain Property, Plant, 
                          and Equipment Items

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
coordinate with the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board 
to establish accounting standards for large and unordinary 
general property, plant, and equipment items.

                  Subtitle B--Counter-Drug Activities


Section 1011--Extension of Authority to Provide Additional Support for 
         Counter-drug Activities of Certain Foreign Governments

    This section would extend, by 1 year, the authority to 
provide support for counterdrug activities of certain foreign 
governments, originally authorized by subsection (a)(2) of 
section 1033 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85), and most recently amended 
by section 1013 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66).

       Section 1012--Statement of Policy on Plan Central America

    This section would express a series of findings and a 
statement of policy on a Plan Central America to address the 
threatening levels of violence, instability, illicit 
trafficking, and transnational organized crime that challenge 
the sovereignty of Central American nations and security of the 
United States. This section would specifically state that it 
shall be the policy of the United States to increase Department 
of Defense efforts to support this plan.
    In the past 10 years, violence and instability in Central 
America has grown due to an increase in transnational organized 
crime, a constant demand from the United States and other 
nations for narcotics and illicit products, and a decrease in 
illicit trafficking in Colombia, which has contributed to the 
rise in illicit trafficking in Central America. The committee 
recognizes the Administration's support of regional efforts to 
address this violence and instability, including its fiscal 
year 2016 request for $1.00 billion in Department of State 
funds to provide assistance to Central America, focused on 
promoting prosperity and regional economic integration, 
enhancing security, and promoting improved governance. However, 
the committee notes that the request contained no funding for 
the Department of Defense to support these efforts, despite its 
responsibility as the lead U.S. Government agency for directing 
illicit trafficking detection and monitoring activities.
    The committee believes that any whole-of-government 
approach for a Plan Central America should also include the 
Department of Defense, and leverage the unique capabilities the 
Department of Defense can provide in areas such as aerial and 
maritime capabilities, building partnership capacity, and the 
detection and monitoring of illicit trafficking. Therefore, to 
complement this statement of policy, elsewhere in this Act the 
committee recommends an increase of $50.0 million for 
Department of Defense Central American programs within the Drug 
Interdiction & Counter-drug Activities appropriation. This 
funding should be focused on aerial and maritime interdiction 
capabilities, building partnership capacity, and increasing 
detection and monitoring of illicit trafficking in Central 
America, and complement the Department of State efforts. The 
committee expects the Department of Defense to provide the 
committee with details on the execution of these additional 
funds.
    The committee commends the work of the U.S. Government, and 
particularly the Department of Defense, in addressing the 
security challenges emanating from Central America. The 
committee is dedicated to addressing these issues in the 
Western Hemisphere and protecting U.S. national security.

                Subtitle C--Naval Vessels and Shipyards


  Section 1021--Restrictions on the Overhaul and Repair of Vessels in 
                           Foreign Shipyards

    This section would amend section 7310 of title 10, United 
States Code, to prohibit the Secretary of the Navy from 
beginning in a shipyard outside the United States or outside a 
territory of the United States any work that is scheduled to be 
for a period of more than 6 months for the overhaul, repair, or 
maintenance of a naval vessel whose homeport is not in the 
United States or Guam. This limitation does not apply to 
emergency or voyage repairs required during an overseas 
homeporting period. This change would be effective on October 
1, 2016, or upon enactment of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, whichever comes later.
    The committee notes that a covered naval vessel does not 
include vessels unable to complete a maintenance availability 
in the United States or a territory of the United States due to 
mechanical, hull, or propulsion limitations.

Section 1022--Extension of Authority for Reimbursement of Expenses for 
                  Certain Navy Mess Operations Afloat

    This section would extend the authority originally provided 
by section 1014 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), 
which authorizes the Department of Defense to fund from Navy 
operation and maintenance accounts the cost of meals on United 
States naval and naval auxiliary vessels for non-military 
personnel, for five years through September 30, 2020.

 Section 1023--Availability of Funds for Retirement or Inactivation of 
            Ticonderoga Class Cruisers or Dock Landing Ships

    This section would limit the obligation and expenditure of 
funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available 
for fiscal year 2016 for the retirement, inactivation, or 
storage of Ticonderoga-class cruisers and Whidbey Island-class 
amphibious ships. This section would also require the 
modernization of two Ticonderoga-class cruisers to begin in 
fiscal year 2016 only after sufficient materials are available 
to begin the modernization period. Finally, the modernization 
period would be limited to 2 years with the ability of the 
Secretary of the Navy to extend the period for another 6 
months.

 Section 1024--Limitation on the Use of Funds for Removal of Ballistic 
      Missile Defense Capabilities from Ticonderoga Class Cruisers

    This section would prohibit the removal of ballistic 
missile capabilities from any of the Ticonderoga class cruisers 
until the Secretary of the Navy certifies to the congressional 
defense committees that the Navy has obtained the ballistic 
missile capabilities required by the most recent Navy Force 
Structure Assessment or determined to upgrade such cruisers 
with an equal or improved ballistic missile defense capability.

                      Subtitle D--Counterterrorism


Section 1031--Permanent Authority to Provide Rewards through Government 
     Personnel of Allied Forces and Certain Other Modifications to 
            Department of Defense Program to Provide Rewards

    This section would modify section 127b of title 10, United 
States Code, to make permanent the authority to make rewards to 
a person providing information or non-lethal assistance to U.S. 
Government personnel or government personnel of allied forces 
participating in a combined operation with U.S. Armed Forces 
conducted outside the United States against terrorism, or 
providing such information or assistance that is beneficial to 
force protection associated with such an operation. The 
committee notes that this program has successfully contributed 
to U.S. counterterrorism objectives at the tactical, strategic, 
and national level. The committee encourages the Department of 
Defense to review and consider how this authority could also be 
used for transnational criminal organizations and activities 
that hold a terrorism nexus.

    Section 1032--Congressional Notification of Sensitive Military 
                               Operations

    This section would modify section 130f of title 10, United 
States Code, by striking the exception to the notification 
requirement for a sensitive military operation executed within 
the territory of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan pursuant 
to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-
40).

     Section 1033--Repeal of Semiannual Reports on Obligation and 
          Expenditure of Funds for Combating Terrorism Program

    This section would modify and streamline reporting 
requirements for budget information related to program for 
combating terrorism as required by section 229 of title 10, 
United States Code. This section would specifically eliminate 
subsection (d) of section 229, regarding semiannual reports on 
obligations and expenditures.

  Section 1034--Reports to Congress on Contact between Terrorists and 
     Individuals Formerly Detained at United States Naval Station, 
                          Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

    This section would amend section 319 of the Supplemental 
Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-32), which requires 
the President to submit a report on individuals detained at 
United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to certain 
members and committees of Congress, to include in the reporting 
requirement a summary of all contact between individuals 
formerly detained at Guantanamo Bay and individuals known or 
suspected to be associated with a foreign terrorist group, and 
whether any of those contacts included information or 
discussion about hostilities against the United States or its 
allies or partners. This section would require that the summary 
of contact between individuals contain any means of 
communication, including but not limited to telecommunications, 
electronic or technical means, in person, or written 
communications. Additionally, the summary of contact between 
individuals shall include all contact, regardless of content.
    The committee notes that the report should account for all 
former Guantanamo detainees who have been in contact with 
individuals known or suspected to be associated with foreign 
terrorist groups regarding hostilities against the United 
States or its allies or partners regardless of whether the 
former detainee has been determined to be suspected or 
confirmed of reengagement using definitions established by the 
U.S. Intelligence Community.
    The requirements of this report are in addition to those 
already required by section 319 of Public Law 111-32, and 
should not be construed to terminate, alter, modify, override, 
or otherwise affect any reporting of information previously 
required by such section.

   Section 1035--Inclusion in Reports to Congress Information about 
  Recidivism of Individuals Formerly Detained at United States Naval 
                     Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

    This section would amend section 319 of the Supplemental 
Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-32), which requires 
the President to submit a report on individuals detained at 
United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to include 
in future quarterly reports the period of time between the date 
on which an individual was released or transferred from 
Guantanamo Bay, and the date on which the individual is 
suspected or confirmed of reengaging in terrorist activities. 
This section would also require a summary of the average amount 
of time for all individuals from the date they were released or 
transferred from Guantanamo Bay until the date on which they 
are suspected or confirmed of re-engaging in terrorist 
activities.

   Section 1036--Prohibition on the Use of Funds for the Transfer or 
    Release of Individuals Detained at United States Naval Station, 
                          Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

    This section would prohibit the use of any amounts 
authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available to 
the Department of Defense to be used during the period 
beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and ending 
on December 31, 2016, to transfer or release detainees at U.S. 
Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to or within the United 
States, its territories, or possessions.

   Section 1037--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

    This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from 
using any of the funds available to the Department of Defense 
during the period beginning on the date of the enactment of 
this Act and ending on December 31, 2016, to modify or 
construct any facility in the United States, its territories, 
or possessions to house any detainee transferred from U.S. 
Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for the purposes of 
detention or imprisonment in the custody or under the effective 
control of the Department of Defense.

   Section 1038--Prohibition on Use of Funds to Transfer or Release 
 Individuals Detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, 
                         Cuba, to Combat Zones

    This section would prohibit the use of funds by the 
Department of Defense to transfer, release, or assist in the 
transfer or release of any individual detained at United States 
Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to a combat zone, as 
defined in this section.

Section 1039--Requirements for Certifications Relating to the Transfer 
 of Detainees at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to 
              Foreign Countries and Other Foreign Entities

    This section would prohibit the use of any amounts 
authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available to 
the Department of Defense to be used during the period 
beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and ending 
on December 31, 2016, to transfer or release any individual 
detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, 
to the individual's country of origin, any other foreign 
country, or any other foreign entity. This prohibition would 
apply unless the Secretary of Defense provides a written 
certification to Congress addressing several requirements at 
least 30 days prior to the transfer of any such individual.
    This section would also prohibit the Secretary of Defense 
from using any funds for the transfer of any such individual to 
the custody or effective control of the individual's country of 
origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity 
if there is a confirmed case of any individual transferred from 
United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the same 
country or entity who engaged in terrorist activity subsequent 
to their transfer.
    This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to waive 
certain certification requirements if the Secretary determines 
that alternative actions will be taken, that actions taken will 
substantially mitigate risks posed by the individual to be 
transferred, and that the transfer is in the national security 
interests of the United States. Whenever the Secretary uses the 
waiver, the Secretary must provide a report that includes a 
copy of the waiver and determination, a statement of the basis 
for the determination, and a summary of the alternative actions 
to be taken.
    Finally, this section would repeal current law, as 
contained in section 1035 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66).
    The committee notes that the Department of Defense failed 
to comply with section 1035 of Public Law 113-66 by failing to 
notify the appropriate committees of Congress not later than 30 
days before the transfer of five individuals detained at 
Guantanamo Bay to the State of Qatar on May 31, 2014. 
Additionally, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) 
concluded that the Department violated section 8111 of the 
Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2014 (division C of 
Public Law 113-76) which prohibits the Department from using 
appropriated funds to transfer any individuals detained at 
Guantanamo unless the Secretary of Defense notifies certain 
congressional committees consistent with section 1035 of Public 
Law 113-66. According to GAO, as a consequence of using its 
appropriations in a manner specifically prohibited by law, the 
Department also violated the Antideficiency Act (Public Law 97-
258).
    The committee also has concerns regarding the Department's 
recent actions related to the transfer of other detainees from 
Guantanamo Bay and the implications for U.S. national security.

 Section 1040--Submission to Congress of Certain Documents Relating to 
        Transfer of Individuals Detained at Guantanamo to Qatar

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense and the 
Attorney General of the United States to submit to the 
congressional defense committees and the Committees on the 
Judiciary of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
certain correspondence between the Department of Defense and 
the Department of Justice, or any other agency or entity of the 
U.S. Government, relating to the May 31, 2014, transfer of five 
individuals from United States Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, 
Cuba, to the State of Qatar. Since the Department of Defense 
has failed to comply with the committee's requests, this 
section would prohibit the obligation or expenditure of 25 
percent of the funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise 
made available for the Office of the Secretary of Defense for 
fiscal year 2016 until the submission of all required 
correspondence.

Section 1041--Submission of Unredacted Copies of Documents Relating to 
  the Transfer of Certain Individuals Detained at Guantanamo to Qatar

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit to the House Committee on Armed Services unredacted 
copies of all documents produced in response to the committee's 
June 9, 2014, request for information regarding the transfer of 
five individuals from United States Naval Station Guantanamo 
Bay, Cuba, to the State of Qatar. This requirement would apply 
to submissions both prior to and subsequent to the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
    This section would also prohibit the obligation or 
expenditure of 25 percent of the funds authorized to be 
appropriated or otherwise made available for the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense for fiscal year 2016 until the Secretary 
submits to the committee unredacted copies of documents that 
the Department has failed to unredact despite the committee's 
requests.

         Subtitle E--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations


  Section 1051--Enhancement of Authority of Secretary of Navy to Use 
                   National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund

    This section would amend section 1022 of the Carl Levin and 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) by expanding the 
transfer authority provided to the National Sea-Based 
Deterrence Fund from the Department of the Navy to the 
Department of Defense; providing authority to enter into 
economic order quantity contracts for ballistic missile 
submarines and other nuclear powered vessels; and providing 
incremental funding and facilities funding authority. This 
section further requires the Secretary of the Navy to submit a 
report on the Fund to the congressional defense committees by 
March 1, 2016, and annually through the year 2025.

      Section 1052--Department of Defense Excess Property Program

    This section would make changes to excess defense article 
donations authorized under section 2576a of title 10, United 
States Code. Specifically, the provision would require the 
establishment of a public website containing information on 
certain transfers made under the program, establish specific 
criteria for State program managers to be met before the 
Defense Logistics Agency may transfer certain types of 
equipment, and mandate several reviews of program objectives 
and efficacy, to include training recommendations, by a 
federally funded research and development center, the 
Comptroller General of the United States, and the Department of 
Defense.

     Section 1053--Limitation of Transfer of Certain AH-64 Apache 
   Helicopters from Army National Guard to Regular Army and Related 
                            Personnel Levels

    This section would amend section 1712(b) of the Carl Levin 
and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) to preserve the 
60-day congressional review of the report from the National 
Commission on the Future of the Army.

Section 1054--Space Available Travel for Environmental Morale Leave by 
  Certain Spouses and Children of Deployed Members of the Armed Forces

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
amend the Air Transportation Eligibility Regulation, DOD 
4515.13-R (1994) (as modified by the December 6, 2007, 
memorandum of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for 
Logistics and Materiel Readiness) to authorize space-available 
travel for environmental morale leave by unaccompanied spouses 
and dependent children of service members deployed for at least 
30 consecutive days under priority category IV. This section 
also requires the Secretary to update any other instructions, 
directives, or internal policies necessary to facilitate this 
expansion.
    The committee notes that the Military Compensation and 
Retirement Modernization Commission, in its final report, found 
that the average service member deploys 2.6 times during their 
time of Active Duty service, with many military occupational 
specialties deploying even more frequently. The Commission also 
noted that an analysis conducted in 2012 showed that, of the 
678,382 Active Duty personnel deployed from 2001 to 2006 as 
part of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, 
a significant portion were deployed for fewer than 120 days.
    The committee recognizes that the current policy governing 
the use of space-available travel under section 2641b of title 
10, United States Code, allowing unaccompanied space-available 
travel for environmental morale leave for military dependents 
of service members deployed for 120 days or more, leaves a 
significant portion of recently deployed service member 
dependents ineligible for this important privilege. The 
committee concurs with the Commission's recommendation that the 
Department of Defense expand space-available travel to a larger 
population of dependents by shortening the deployment length 
needed to qualify for unaccompanied travel on environmental 
morale leave under priority category IV to 30 days.

    Section 1055--Information-Related and Strategic Communications 
                 Capabilities Engagement Pilot Program

    This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to 
establish a pilot program to assess information-related and 
strategic communications capabilities to support the tactical, 
operational, and strategic requirements of the various 
combatant commanders, including urgent and emergent operational 
needs, and the operational and theater security cooperation 
plans of the Geographic and Functional Combatant Commanders.
    The committee is concerned that the U.S. Government is 
losing the battle to operationalize information, which can 
shape the information environment and support its operational 
goals. The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and Al 
Qaeda are using radical jihadist narratives to shape the 
battlefield, drive recruitment and support, and inspire 
imitators outside their main area of control. In the case of 
ISIL, it is able to use the narratives in ways that reinforce 
its battlefield successes.
    In addition, the Russian Federation has reinvigorated its 
uses of narratives to create uncertainty, providing cover for 
its activities and helping to shape the battlefield. It deploys 
similar narratives to mobilize support in society at home and, 
where possible, in the local population of other countries.
    The committee does not believe that the U.S. Government, 
including the Department of Defense, is effectively 
coordinating its efforts in ways that can fundamentally root 
out and eliminate the narratives that drive these movements. 
The committee believes that the lack of an overall strategy to 
support unity of effort is a major deficit to the U.S. 
Government's actions. The inability to be proactive in our 
information engagement, or to be responsive enough from a 
defensive perspective to operate on the timescales of our 
adversaries, are also flaws in how the Department of Defense 
and the U.S. Government approach this problem.
    The committee believes that providing the authority for the 
Department to carry out the pilot program established in this 
section would provide the flexibility needed to try out 
different approaches, tailored to the operating environment and 
circumstances, to see more broadly which approaches work and 
which do not. The committee also believes that there is an 
important technology component that has not been well-utilized 
in the past, which will help the military sense, respond and 
plan for operations in the information environment in ways that 
traditional approaches do not provide.

Section 1056--Prohibition on Use of Funds for Retirement of Helicopter 
                 Sea Combat Squadron 84 and 85 Aircraft

    This section would provide that none of the funds 
authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2016 or otherwise 
made available for such fiscal year for the Navy may be 
obligated or expended to: (1) retire, prepare to retire, 
transfer, or place in storage any Helicopter Sea Combat 
Squadron 84 (HSC 84) or Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron 85 (HSC-
85) aircraft; or (2) make any changes to manning levels with 
respect to any HSC-84 or HSC-85 aircraft squadron.
    The section includes an exception that would allow the 
Secretary of the Navy to waive this restriction provided that 
the Secretary certifies that he has conducted a cost-benefit 
analysis identifying saving to the Department of Defense and 
has identified a replacement capability to meet all operational 
requirements.

 Section 1057--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Destruction of 
                           Certain Landmines

    This section would provide that none of the funds 
authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2016 or otherwise 
made available for such fiscal year for the Department of 
Defense may be obligated or expended for the destruction of 
anti-personnel landmines (APL) of the United States until: the 
Secretary of Defense publishes a study on the effects of a ban 
of such landmines; alternatives to such landmines are 
specifically authorized by law and provided appropriations; 
such alternatives are fully deployed and members of the U.S. 
armed forces and allies of the U.S. are fully trained in their 
use; and, the Secretary has certified that the replacement of 
current APL with such alternatives will not endanger members of 
the U.S. Armed Forces or of the armed forces of allies of the 
U.S.
    This section includes an exception that would allow the 
demilitarization or destruction of APL that the Secretary 
certifies have become unsafe or pose a safety risk.

Section 1058--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Modifying Command 
               and Control of United States Pacific Fleet

    This section would limit the availability of fiscal year 
2016 funds to modify command and control relationships to give 
Fleet Forces Command operational and administrative control of 
Navy forces assigned to the Pacific Fleet.

    Section 1059--Prohibition on the Closure of United States Naval 
                     Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

    This section would prohibit the closure of United States 
Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and require the President 
to ensure that the obligations of the United States under 
Article III of the Treaty between the United States and Cuba 
signed at Washington, D.C., on May 29, 1934, are met. This 
section would also express the sense of Congress on the 
strategic importance of Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and 
require a report from the Commander of U.S. Southern Command on 
a military assessment of the Naval Station.

                    Subtitle F--Studies and Reports


 Section 1061--Provision of Defense Planning Guidance and Contingency 
               Planning Guidance Information to Congress

    This section would amend section 113(g) of title 10, United 
States Code, to require the Secretary of Defense to provide to 
the congressional defense committees, not later than 120 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, a report 
containing summaries of the defense planning guidance and 
contingency planning guidance developed in accordance with the 
requirements of such section, and to include those summaries in 
the annual budget documents submitted to Congress. 
Additionally, this section would provide a limitation on the 
obligation or expenditure of 25 percent of the funds, 
authorized to be appropriated by this Act for Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-wide, for the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense, until 15 days after the date on which the Secretary of 
Defense submits the first report required by this section.

Section 1062--Modification of Certain Reports Submitted by Comptroller 
                      General of the United States

    This section would amend section 3255(a)(2) of the National 
Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2455) to provide 
the Comptroller General of the United States, in any odd-
numbered year, 150 days to submit the report required by such 
section. The committee believes the Comptroller General's 
analysis under this section would benefit from information 
contained in the Stockpile Stewardship and Management Plan and, 
therefore, provides the Comptroller General additional time. 
However, the committee expects the Comptroller General will 
still provide the committee an interim briefing on these 
matters in odd-numbered years to support the committee's 
legislative calendar.
    This section would also amend section 3134 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-
84) to eliminate a requirement for the Comptroller General to 
conduct a final review of all projects carried out by the 
Department of Energy's Office of Environmental Management using 
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-
5) funds. The committee understands that as of last year, only 
one project within the scope of this review remained incomplete 
and the Comptroller General believes no significant issues have 
come to light that merit additional review and reporting. The 
committee recommends repeal of this final reporting mandate so 
that the Comptroller General can focus oversight resources on 
higher-priority committee requirements.

     Section 1063--Report on Implementation of the Geographically 
   Distributed Force Laydown in the Area of Responsibility of United 
                         States Pacific Command

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense, in 
consultation with the Commander of U.S. Pacific Command 
(PACOM), to submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees not later than March 1, 2016, on the Department of 
Defense's plans for implementing the geographically distributed 
force laydown in the area of responsibility of U.S. Pacific 
Command.
    The committee notes that PACOM has made several posture 
changes within its area of responsibility in recent years, and 
several more are planned. These include the realignment of U.S. 
Marine Corps forces across Japan, Guam, and Hawaii; the 
rotation of U.S. forces to Darwin in the Commonwealth of 
Australia; and the planned enhancement of a rotational presence 
of U.S. forces in the Republic of the Philippines. While the 
committee understands PACOM's desire for greater operational 
resiliency and survivability, particularly given the complex 
and lethal environment that PACOM expects to operate in, it is 
concerned about the demands such posture changes place on 
supporting commands and the military services. For example, the 
Commandant of the Marine Corps testified before the Senate 
Committee on Armed Services on March 10, 2015, on the 
additional lift capabilities that would be required to support 
PACOM's distributed force laydown. Therefore, the committee 
seeks to understand the requirements for support assets and 
infrastructure, and how the Department of Defense plans to 
address them.

     Section 1064--Independent Study of National Security Strategy 
                          Formulation Process

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
contract with an independent research entity to carry out a 
comprehensive study of the Department of Defense role in, and 
process for, the formulation of national security strategy. The 
study would include the following:
    (1) A review of case studies of previous national security 
strategy formulation processes;
    (2) An examination of issues such as the frequency of 
strategy updates, the synchronization of timelines and content 
among different strategies, and the links between strategy and 
resourcing; and
    (3) A review of the current national security strategy 
formulation process as it relates to the Department of Defense, 
to include an analysis of current defense-related national 
security strategy documents, such as the 2015 National Security 
Strategy, the 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review, and the 2011 
National Military Strategy.
    The committee believes such a study will enhance its 
oversight of the national defense and national military 
strategy development and execution process, and complement its 
efforts to reform such strategies, such as its reform of the 
Quadrennial Defense Review contained in section 1072 of the 
Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291).
    The committee further expects that the annual budget 
request of the Department of Defense will contain clear 
linkages to the relevant current national security strategies.

  Section 1065--Study and Report on Role of Department of Defense in 
                   Formulation of Long-term Strategy

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
direct the Office of Net Assessment to conduct a study on the 
role of the Department of Defense in the formulation of long-
term strategy, and to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees on the results of the study not later than 
two years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

   Section 1066--Report on Potential Threats to Members of the Armed 
Forces of United States Naval Forces Central Command and United States 
                         Fifth Fleet in Bahrain

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a report, not later than 180 days after the enactment of 
this Act, to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and 
the House of Representatives on the threat posed to members of 
the Armed Forces of the U.S. Naval Forces Central Command and 
the U.S. Fifth Fleet from Naval Support Activity Bahrain, and 
their families, should there be an increase in violent clashes 
in the Kingdom of Bahrain.

     Subtitle G--Repeal or Revision of National Defense Reporting 
                              Requirements


 Section 1071--Repeal or Revision of Reporting Requirements Related to 
                       Military Personnel Issues

    This section would repeal or revise certain reporting 
requirements related to acquisition that are overly burdensome 
on the Department of Defense, duplicative, or outdated, to 
include:
    (a) Repealing section 1073b of title 10, United States 
Code, related to health protection and health assessment data.
    (b) Amending section 1566(c) of title 10, United States 
Code, by striking subsections (2) and (3) related to voting 
assistance programs.
    (c) Amending section 301b(i) of title 37, United States 
Code, by striking subsection (2) related to aviation officer 
retention bonuses.
    (d) Amending section 316a of title 37, United States Code, 
by striking subsection (f) related to foreign language 
proficiency incentive pay.
    (e) Amending section 553 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81) by 
striking subsection (e) related to waiver authority for 
military service academy appointments.
    (f) Repealing subsection (e) of section 548 of the Duncan 
Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 
(Public Law 110-417), related to Junior Reserve Officers' 
Training Units.
    (g) Amending section 582(e) of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) by 
striking paragraph (4) related to a report on the Yellow Ribbon 
Reintegration Program.
    (h) Amending section 1648 of the Wounded Warrior Act (10 
U.S.C. 1071) by striking subsection (f) related to facility 
standards.
    (i) Amending section 1662 of the Wounded Warrior Act (10 
U.S.C. 1071) by striking subsection (b) related to inspection 
of facilities.
    (j) Amending section 3307 of the U.S. Troop Readiness, 
Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery and Iraq Accountability 
Appropriations Act, 2007 (10 U.S.C. 1073) by striking 
subsection (d) related to inspections of facilities.
    (k) Amending section 574 of the John Warner National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-
364) by striking subsection (c) related to assistance to local 
education agencies.

    Section 1072--Repeal or Revision of Certain Reports Relating to 
                               Readiness

    This section would repeal or revise certain reporting 
requirements to include:
    (a) Amending chapter 9 of title 10, United States Code, by 
striking section 228, which requires a biannual report on the 
allocation of funds within operation and maintenance budget 
sub-activities.
    (b) Amending section 7431 of title 10, United States Code, 
by striking subsection (c), which requires an annual report on 
Naval Petroleum Reserve.
    (c) Amending chapter 1013 of title 10, United States Code, 
by striking section 10542, which requires an annual report on 
Army National Guard combat readiness.
    (d) Amending section 922 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81) by 
striking subsection (f), which requires a report on the insider 
threat detection budget submission.
    (e) Repealing section 892 of the Ike Skelton National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-
383), which requires a report on price trend analysis.
    (f) Amending section 351 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84) by 
striking subsection (b), which requires a report on the use of 
the authority for airlift transportation at Department of 
Defense rates for non-Department of Defense Federal cargoes.
    (g) Amending section 358 of the Duncan Hunter National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-
417) by striking subsection (c), which requires a report on the 
procurement of military working dogs, and by making other 
technical conforming changes.
    (h) Repealing section 958 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181), 
which requires a report on foreign language proficiency.
    (i) Amending section 343 of the Floyd D. Spence National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-
398) by striking subsection (g), which requires a report on the 
arsenal support program initiative.
    (j) Amending section 345 of the Strom Thurmond National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-
26) by striking subsection (d), which mandates an ongoing 
Comptroller General review of the contractor-operated Civil 
Engineering Supply Stores Program, and by making other 
technical conforming changes.
    (k) Repealing section 8104 of the Department of Defense 
Appropriations Act, 2014 (division C of Public Law 113-76), 
which requires a quarterly report on end strength.
    (l) Repealing section 8105 of the Department of Defense 
Appropriations Act, 2013 (division C of Public Law 113-6), 
which requires a quarterly report on end strength.
    (m) Repealing section 806 of the David L. Boren National 
Security Education Act of 1991 (title VIII of Public Law 102-
183), which requires a report on the David L. Boren National 
Security Education Act of 1991.

 Section 1073--Repeal or Revision of Reporting Requirements Related to 
                   Naval Vessels and Merchant Marine

    This section would repeal or revise certain reporting 
requirements that are overly burdensome, duplicative, or 
outdated, to include:
    (a) Amending section 7292 of title 10, United States Code, 
to strike subsection (d) that required a 30 day congressional 
notice before the Secretary of the Navy names a naval vessel;
    (b) Amending section 7306 of title 10, United States Code, 
to strike subsection (d) that required a 30 day congressional 
notice before Secretary of the Navy can transfer any vessel 
from the Naval Vessel Register to any State or not-for-profit 
entity;
    (c) Amending section 126 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239) to 
delete a requirement for a quarterly report on Mission Modules 
of the Littoral Combat Ship;
    (d) Deleting section 124 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) 
that required an assessment prior to the start of construction 
on the first ship of a shipbuilding program;
    (e) Amending section 122 of the John Warner National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-
364) to delete a quarterly reporting requirement associated 
with the Ford class carrier;
    (f) Amending section 50111 of title 46, United States Code, 
to request the Secretary of Transportation to submit a report 
to the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation of the Senate the Maritime Administration 
authorization request for that fiscal year; and
    (g) Deleting a monthly reporting mandate that is provided 
by the Secretary of the Navy to the congressional defense 
committees on open architecture, and a monthly report on the 
USS Ford-class carrier.

 Section 1074--Repeal or Revision of Reporting Requirements Related to 
              Nuclear, Proliferation, and Related Matters

    This section would repeal or revise certain reporting 
requirements that are overly burdensome, duplicative, or 
outdated to include:
    (a) Amending section 179 of title 10, United States Code, 
and strike subsection (g) related to an annual report by the 
Chairman of the Nuclear Weapons Council.
    (b) Amending section 1821(b) of the Implementing 
Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (50 U.S.C. 
2911) by striking paragraphs (2) and (3) related to a biannual 
reporting requirement on the Proliferation Security Initiative.
    (c) Amending section 1282 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (22 U.S.C. 5951) by 
striking subsection (a) related to briefings on dialogue 
between the United States and the Russian Federation on nuclear 
arms.
    (d) Amending section 1072 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (50 U.S.C. 3043) by 
striking subsection (b) requiring an annual update to an 
implementation plan for the whole-of-government vision 
prescribed in the National Security Strategy.

 Section 1075--Repeal or Revision of Reporting Requirements Related to 
                            Missile Defense

    This section would repeal or revise certain reporting 
requirements that are overly burdensome, duplicative, or 
outdated. This section would amend section 232 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-
81) by striking subsection (b) requiring Annual Reports on 
Missile Defense Executive Board. This section would also amend 
section 234 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81) by striking subsections 
(a) and (b) requiring a report on the Ground-based Midcourse 
Defense system.

 Section 1076--Repeal or Revision of Reporting Requirements Related to 
                              Acquisition

    This section would repeal or revise certain reporting 
requirements related to acquisition that are overly burdensome 
on the Department of Defense, duplicative, or outdated, to 
include:
    (a) Repealing section 8305 of title 41, United States Code, 
which requires that, not later than 60 days after the end of 
each fiscal year, the Secretary of Defense submit to Congress a 
report on the amount of purchases by the Department of Defense 
from foreign entities in that fiscal year.
    (b) Striking subsection (f) of section 2334 of title 10, 
United States Code, which requires an annual report on cost 
assessment activities.
    (c) Striking subsection (f) of section 2438 of title 10, 
United States Code, which requires an annual report on 
performance assessments and root cause analyses activities.

 Section 1077--Repeal or Revision of Reporting Requirements Related to 
                           Civilian Personnel

    This section would repeal or revise certain reporting 
requirements to include:
    (a) Amending section 1110(i) of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84), by 
striking a report on the pilot program for the temporary 
exchange of information technology personnel.
    (b) Amending section 1101(g) of the Strom Thurmond National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-
261) by striking the annual report on extension and 
modification of experimental personnel management program for 
scientific and technical personnel.

      Section 1078--Repeal or Revision of Miscellaneous Reporting 
                              Requirements

    This section would repeal or revise certain reporting 
requirements that are overly burdensome, duplicative, or 
outdated. Reports to be repealed or revised include:
    (a) Amending section 127b of title 10, United States Code, 
by striking the annual report on rewards for assistance in 
combating terrorism;
    (b) Amending section 138b of title 10, United States Code, 
by striking paragraph (2) that required a report by Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering assessing the 
technological maturity of critical technologies of major 
defense acquisition programs;
    (c) Amending section 139b(d) of title 10, United States 
Code, by striking the annual report required for the Deputy 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems Engineering:
    (d) Amending section 2249c of title 10, United States Code, 
by striking the annual report on Regional Defense Combating 
Terrorism Fellowship Program;
    (e) Repealing section 2352 of title 10, United States Code, 
which required the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency 
submit a biennial strategic plan;
    (f) Repealing section 112 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239) 
which required annual reports on Army airlift requirements;
    (g) Repealing the annual Comptroller General report on In-
Kind Payments required by section 2805 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239);
    (h) Amending section 112(b) of the Ike Skelton National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-
383) by striking paragraph (3) which requires an annual report 
on airborne signals intelligence, surveillance and 
reconnaissance capabilities by the Department of Defense; and
    (i) Repealing section 1034 of the Duncan Hunter National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-
417), which required a semi-annual report on the Next 
Generation Enterprise Network.

                       Subtitle H--Other Matters


            Section 1081--Technical and Clerical Amendments

    This section would make a number of technical and clerical 
amendments of a non-substantive nature to existing law.

   Section 1082--Executive Agent for the Oversight and Management of 
               Alternative Compensatory Control Measures

    This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to 
establish an executive agent for the oversight and management 
of alternative compensatory control measures. This section 
would also require the Secretary of Defense to submit a report 
to the congressional defense committees not later than 30 days 
after the close of each of the fiscal years 2016 through 2020, 
on the oversight and management of alternative compensatory 
control measures.

      Section 1083--Navy Support of Ocean Research Advisory Panel

    This section would modify the statutory requirement for the 
Secretary of the Navy to make funds available on an annual 
basis to support the activities of the Ocean Research Advisory 
Panel (ORAP).
    The committee believes that this realignment of agency 
responsibility for supporting the ORAP from the Department of 
the Navy to another agency is consistent with the function of 
this advisory board and that the support responsibilities of 
ORAP are more appropriately aligned outside of the Department 
of the Navy. The committee notes that this change would not 
affect or diminish the statutory authorities of the National 
Ocean Research Leadership Council or the National Oceanographic 
Partnership Program, or their respective relationships with the 
ORAP.

  Section 1084--Level of Readiness of Civil Reserve Air Fleet Carriers

    This section would make a series of findings about the 
National Airlift Policy and the Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF). 
This section would also amend Chapter 931 of title 10, United 
States Code, by creating a new subsection addressing the 
readiness of the CRAF. Specifically, this new section would 
codify the importance of the CRAF and the need to provide 
appropriate levels of commercial airlift augmentation to 
maintain networks and infrastructure, exercise the system, and 
interface effectively within the military airlift system. This 
section also would require the Secretary of Defense to provide, 
concurrent with the submission of the President's request:
    1) An assessment of the number of block hours necessary to 
achieve sufficient levels of commercial airlift augmentation;
    2) A strategic plan for achieving necessary levels of 
commercial airlift augmentation; and
    3) An explanation of any deviation from the previous fiscal 
year's assessment.

    Section 1085--Authorization of Transfer of Surplus Firearms to 
  Corporation for the Promotion of Rifle Practice and Firearms Safety

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
transfer surplus firearms, spare parts, and related accessories 
under the control of the Secretary of the Army to the 
Corporation for the Promotion of Rifle Practice and Firearms 
Safety, also known as the Civilian Marksmanship Program.

 Section 1086--Modification of Requirements for Transferring Aircraft 
                     within the Air Force Inventory

    This section would amend section 345 of the Ike Skelton 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public 
Law 111-383) to ease administrative burdens and facilitate 
routine transfers of aircraft from the Reserve Components to 
the Active Component of the Air Force.

Section 1087--Reestablishment of Commission to Assess the Threat to the 
            United States from Electromagnetic Pulse Attacks

    This section would reestablish the Commission to Assess the 
Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse Attack, 
including providing updated guidance on the membership and 
duties of that commission.

      Section 1088--Department of Defense Strategy for Countering 
                         Unconventional Warfare

    This section would required the Secretary of Defense, in 
consultation with the President and the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff, to develop a strategy for the Department of 
Defense to counter unconventional warfare threats posed by 
adversarial state and non-state actors. This section would 
require the Secretary of Defense to submit the strategy to the 
congressional defense committees within 180 days after the date 
of the enactment of this Act.
    The committee is concerned about the growing unconventional 
warfare capabilities and threats being posed most notably and 
recently by the Russian Federation and the Islamic Republic of 
Iran. The committee notes that unconventional warfare is 
defined most accurately as those activities conducted to enable 
a resistance movement or insurgency to coerce, disrupt, or 
overthrow a government or occupying power by operating through 
or with an underground, auxiliary, or guerrilla force in a 
denied area. The committee also notes that most state-sponsors 
of unconventional warfare, such as Russia and Iran, have 
doctrinally linked conventional warfare, economic warfare, 
cyber warfare, information operations, intelligence operations, 
and other activities seamlessly in an effort to undermine U.S. 
national security objectives and the objectives of U.S. allies 
alike.

             Section 1089--Mine Countermeasures Master Plan

    This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to 
submit a mine countermeasures master plan to the congressional 
defense committees along with the annual budget request of each 
fiscal year from 2018 through 2023. The master plan shall 
include an assessment of the current and future capabilities, 
capacities, requirements, and readiness levels associated with 
mine countermeasure assets required to meet operational plans 
and contingency requirements. This section would also require 
the Secretary of the Navy to submit a one-time report to the 
congressional defense committees within 1 year of enactment of 
this Act as to current and future mine countermeasure force 
structure based on current mine countermeasure capabilities, 
including an assessment as to whether certain decommissioned 
ships should be retained in reserve operating status.

 Section 1090--Congressional Notification and Briefing Requirement on 
Ordered Evacuations of United States Embassies and Consulates Involving 
                 the Use of United States Armed Forces

    This section would direct the Secretary of Defense and the 
Secretary of State to provide joint notification to the 
appropriate congressional committees as soon as practicable 
after the initiation of an evacuation operation of a U.S. 
embassy or consulate involving the use of U.S. Armed Forces. It 
would also require the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary 
of State to provide a joint briefing to the appropriate 
congressional committees within 15 days of an evacuation 
operation of a U.S. embassy or consulate involving the use of 
the Armed Forces.

  Section 1091--Determination and Disclosure of Transportation Costs 
 Incurred by Secretary of Defense for Congressional Trips Outside the 
                             United States

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
determine and disclose the transportation costs incurred by the 
Department of Defense for certain congressional trips outside 
the United States.

                  TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


 Assessment of Hiring Authorities for Personnel at the Major Range and 
                           Test Facility Base

    The committee is aware of the special civilian personnel 
needs of the Department of Defense for its scientific and 
engineering community, especially within the laboratories and 
engineering centers. The committee has traditionally been 
supportive of these unique authorities to be able to attract, 
hire and retain high quality, skilled technical expertise 
within the civilian workforce, and recognizes that many of 
those technical skills will be needed in other parts of the 
Department, such as the test and evaluation community. The 
Laboratory Demonstration program was established to provide 
personnel flexibility for that specialized community, and 
because of the related needs of test community in the Major 
Range and Test Facility Base (MRTFB), the committee recognizes 
that it would be valuable to understand whether those 
flexibilities might be useful for that community, and if so, 
how those authorities might be extended. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a 
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by November 
30, 2015 which assesses the feasibility of extending the 
Laboratory Demonstration program to the entities of the MRTFB. 
This briefing should include a cost-benefit assessment that 
includes the advantages and disadvantages of such a decision, 
as well as specification of the facilities that would most 
benefit from inclusion in the Laboratory Demonstration program.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


   Section 1101--One-Year Extension of Temporary Authority to Grant 
Allowances, Benefits, and Gratuities to Civilian Personnel on Official 
                         Duty in a Combat Zone

    This section would modify section 1603(a)(2) of the 
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the 
Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery, 2006 (Public Law 
109-234) to extend by 1 year the temporary discretionary 
authority to Federal agencies to grant allowances, benefits, 
and gratuities comparable to those provided to members of the 
foreign service to an agency's civilian employees on official 
duty in a combat zone.

 Section 1102--Authority to Provide Additional Allowances and Benefits 
               for Defense Clandestine Service Employees

    This section would enable the Secretary of Defense to 
include certain civilians who are assigned to the Defense 
Clandestine Service among the population of the Department of 
Defense workforce eligible to receive special pay, allowances, 
and benefits, in addition to basic pay, similar to that 
provided to employees performing comparable, specialized work. 
The committee intends that this section provide the authority 
for the Secretary of Defense to establish a special allowance 
to help create and maintain a workforce that is more mobile in 
support of the Defense Intelligence Agency's worldwide mission.

 Section 1103--Extension of Rate of Overtime Pay for Department of the 
  Navy Employees Performing Work Aboard or Dockside in Support of the 
       Nuclear-Powered Aircraft Carrier Forward Deployed in Japan

    This section would amend section 5542(a)(6)(B) of title 5, 
United States Code, to extend for 2 years the authority for a 
civilian employee of the Department of the Navy who is assigned 
to temporary duty to perform work aboard or dockside in direct 
support of the nuclear aircraft carrier that is forward 
deployed in Japan, to receive overtime pay.

    Section 1104--Modification to Temporary Authorities for Certain 
 Positions at Department of Defense Research and Engineering Facilities

    This section would modify section 1107 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-
66) to allow for the noncompetitive conversion of students that 
have graduated from an applicable institution of higher learner 
to a permanent appointment. Additionally, this section would 
change the percentages of the work force that would be eligible 
for direct hiring authorities.

Section 1105--Preference Eligibility for Members of Reserve Components 
of the Armed Forces Appointed to Competitive Service; Clarification of 
                             Appeal Rights

    The section would grant hiring preferences for Federal 
employment to members of a Reserve Component of the Armed 
Forces who have successfully completed Officer Candidate 
Training or entry level skill training, and performing a 6-year 
commitment, completed 10 years of service, or retired.

             TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS

                                OVERVIEW

    Framing the committee's oversight of national security 
matters relating to foreign nations is the observation that the 
Nation is in the midst of a complex and challenging security 
environment. As senior U.S. statesman Dr. Henry Kissinger 
testified to the Senate Committee on Armed Services in January 
2015, ``The United States has not faced a more diverse and 
complex array of crises since the end of the Second World 
War.'' The Nation also faces unprecedented technological 
challenges, with enemies and potential competitors focusing on 
the development of technologies to offset areas of American 
military strength. The committee believes that the magnitude, 
scope, and simultaneity of the threats currently facing the 
Nation are truly unprecedented.
    The committee concurs with the observation by the National 
Defense Panel in its July 2014 report to Congress that, ``Since 
World War II, no matter which party has controlled the White 
House or Congress, America's global military capability and 
commitment has been the strategic foundation undergirding our 
global leadership.'' Therefore, the provisions contained in 
this title reinforce the committee's belief that American 
military strength, commitment, and presence will continue to be 
necessary to deter aggression, reassure U.S. allies and 
partners, and exercise global influence to shape a world order 
aligned with U.S. national interests.
    The committee continues its focus on U.S. military 
operations in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, with the 
bill providing extensions to key authorities, the authorization 
of necessary funding, and expressing the committee's view that 
the withdrawal of U.S. troops should occur only on a pace 
consistent with the ability of the Afghan National Security 
Forces to sustain itself and secure Afghanistan.
    The committee has also focused its oversight on the efforts 
of the Department of Defense to counter the Islamic State of 
Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and address the growing instability 
and terrorism threats across the Middle East and Africa. The 
committee is concerned by many aspects of the Administration's 
larger efforts in Iraq and Syria, in particular, as part of 
Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR). It remains concerned by the 
lack of a comprehensive strategy for the Middle East and to 
counter Islamic extremism and would thus direct the Secretary 
of Defense and Secretary of State to develop such a strategy. 
The bill would also require the Department to provide greater 
detail on OIR command and control arrangements, the numbers and 
types of armed forces deployed as part of OIR, and provide 
increased support to allies and partners in the region, such as 
the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, to enhance their capability to 
fight ISIL. Furthermore, the bill would provide greater 
assistance to the Kurdish Peshmerga, the Sunni tribal security 
forces with a national security mission, and the Iraqi Sunni 
National Guard to increase their capability to fight ISIL, 
while also conditioning security assistance funds on progress 
towards on political inclusiveness by the Government of the 
Republic of Iraq.
    The committee also remains concerned about the Islamic 
Republic of Iran's nuclear program and its malign military 
activities, and H.R. 1735 would express the committee's view 
that these destabilizing activities constitute a grave threat 
to regional stability and U.S. national security interests, 
that Congress should review and assess any agreement regarding 
Iran's nuclear program, and that the United States must 
continue to strengthen the defense of allies and partners in 
the region.
    The committee has also focused on the Department's efforts 
to deter aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine 
and other allies and partners in Europe. The committee 
recognizes that Russia has employed unconventional warfare 
methods in areas such as cyber warfare, economic warfare, 
information operations, and intelligence operations, and 
believes that the Department's European Reassurance Initiative 
efforts should focus on countering such methods, as well as 
continuing conventional reassurance and deterrence activities. 
The bill would also authorize appropriations to provide 
sustainment and assistance to the military and national 
security forces of Ukraine, including the explicit 
authorization of lethal weapons of a defensive nature to 
enhance the defense of Ukraine and deter further Russian 
aggression.
    The year 2015 marks the 70th anniversary of the end of the 
Allied military engagement in the Pacific theater and the end 
of the Second World War. In recognition of this milestone, H.R. 
1735 would express a sense of Congress the tremendous 
sacrifice, bravery, and loss of U.S. and Allied Forces during 
the war. The bill would also highlight the close relationship 
forged between the United States and Japan since the end of the 
war, including expressing the committee's support for the 
recent finalization of the Guidelines for U.S.-Japan Defense 
Cooperation, and require the President to develop a strategy to 
promote U.S. interests in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region.
    Lastly, the committee notes that the Department has placed 
greater emphasis on security cooperation in general, and 
building partner capacity specifically, and the committee 
believes increased oversight of these activities is necessary. 
Therefore, the bill would require the Secretary of Defense, in 
coordination with the Secretary of State, to develop a 
strategic framework for Department of Defense security 
cooperation to guide prioritization of resources and 
activities, and require the Comptroller General of the United 
States to conduct an inventory of Department of Defense 
security cooperation programs.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                     Central American Police Forces

    The committee notes the continued, collective work of the 
nations of Central America to address regional stability and 
security. The committee acknowledges that there is a lack of 
confidence by the citizens of many of these countries in their 
domestic police forces. This lack of confidence in domestic 
police forces, coupled with weak judicial institutions, results 
in many of these countries utilizing their military forces to 
provide internal security. However, these countries also 
recognize that they must improve the public's confidence in 
their police forces, which includes creating greater 
accountability within these forces. As noted in the November 
2014 agreement between the Republic of Honduras, the Republic 
of Guatemala, and the Republic of El Salvador, the ``Alliance 
for Prosperity in the Northern Triangle: A Road Map,'' these 
nations will ``bring the police closer to the community, 
including through solid accountability mechanisms that improve 
the image of the policy and people's trust in them.'' The 
Alliance for Prosperity has also articulated its commitment to 
provide greater transparency and access to information on 
government functions, actions, and plans to its nations' 
citizens.
    The committee commends the Alliance for Prosperity for 
addressing this challenge. The committee urges the President of 
the United States to encourage the Governments of Honduras, 
Guatemala, and El Salvador to implement the public security 
strategy contained in the Alliance for Prosperity road map and 
to make those nation-specific implementation plans publicly 
available. The committee further encourages these Central 
American nations to transition responsibility for public 
security from the military to domestic police forces as 
stability and security in these nations strengthen and as their 
police forces and judicial institutions improve.

      Combatant Commander Requirements for Directed Energy Weapons

    The committee remains committed to the development and 
deployment of directed energy weapons, including both lasers 
and high-powered microwave systems. While the committee sees 
much progress amongst the services and the defense agencies in 
investing in key programs, there are still concerns regarding 
the planning for how to transition these developmental systems 
into programs of record. The committee believes that refinement 
of the technology is important in the long-run, but that 
without strong warfighter support and buy-in, transition will 
be a low priority for both the acquisition and operational 
communities.
    Elsewhere in this bill, the committee has directed the 
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff, to develop a plan for integrating 
advanced weapon systems such as directed energy weapons, into 
exercises already being conducted by the armed forces. The 
committee believes this is necessary to do the concept 
development and experimentation needed to get operational 
warfighters comfortable with the technology and integrated into 
the way they conduct operations. The committee also believes 
that the Department of Defense should gain a better 
understanding of the perspectives of the various combatant 
commanders in how they might employ such systems. Such an 
assessment will help the technology community better refine 
what applications they should be developing, as well as provide 
a more comprehensive understanding by the combatant commands on 
how it might leverage advances in directed energy technology.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff, in consultation with the relevant geographic 
and functional combatant commanders, to review the integrated 
priority lists of these commands for the potential requirements 
they might have articulated that might be satisfied by 
leveraging directed energy technology, and brief the results of 
this review to the House Committee on Armed Services by 
November 15, 2015. The briefing should also include any 
recommendations on how to improve the coordination between the 
combatant commands and the acquisition community on developing 
these integrated priority lists, as well as any recommendations 
on actions to improve the transition to developmental efforts 
to support the affected commands.

         Command and Control within Operation Inherent Resolve

    The committee notes the complexity of Operation Inherent 
Resolve (OIR). It comprises multiple lines of effort to 
include: training and equipping of various security forces in 
the Republic of Iraq and of vetted groups and individuals 
opposing the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic, conducting 
air strikes in Iraq and Syria, combating the flow of foreign 
fighters to and from Iraq and Syria, conducting liaison 
activities across many elements in multiple countries, 
maintaining the international coalition and coordinating their 
activities, and improving the military capabilities of allies 
and partners in the region.
    The committee further notes the geographic dispersion of 
OIR, which includes the operational planning and execution of 
this mission across at least four different countries. The 
committee believes that all of the lines of effort within OIR 
must be carefully coordinated across the full spectrum and area 
of operations. The committee is concerned that the current 
command and control relationships and arrangements within OIR 
are not achieving the coordination and synchronization required 
to be effective in meeting the OIR endstates.
    As currently structured, training and equipping efforts in 
Syria, training and equipping efforts in Iraq, and the conduct 
of airstrikes in both Iraq and Syria appear to be synchronized 
at the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) level. Further, many of 
the associated activities required to effectively combat the 
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, such as ending the flow 
of foreign fighters and coordinating with the Government of the 
Republic of Turkey, are, in large part, being conducted by 
other combatant commands, including U.S. European Command and 
U.S. Africa Command. The committee is concerned that the 
ineffective approach to coordinating all of these lines of 
effort could contribute to undermining the OIR mission.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to brief the House Committee on Armed Services not later than 
August 1, 2015, on the current command and control arrangements 
within OIR. The briefing should include a discussion of the 
command and control relationships of each command element 
within OIR, as well as the processes for coordinating and 
synchronizing efforts within CENTCOM, across combatant 
commands, and between allies and partners. The briefing should 
also include a description of how the Office of Security 
Cooperation in Iraq integrates into the command and control 
structure for Operation Inherent Resolve in Iraq and any 
changes and recommendations under consideration to modify the 
current command and control arrangements in order to further 
enhance the effectiveness of the OIR mission.

    Comptroller General Inventory of Department of Defense Security 
                          Cooperation Programs

    The committee supports Department of Defense security 
cooperation efforts to develop and sustain partner nation 
security capabilities. Improving the security capabilities of 
partner nations may mitigate risks to U.S. national security 
and reduce the likelihood of U.S. intervention. The committee 
is concerned, however, that Department of Defense security 
cooperation programs lack strategic direction, may not act in 
concert with other programs, and are not resourced for long-
term sustainability. In this regard, the committee intends to 
work with the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of 
Representatives on a broad review of U.S. security cooperation 
and security assistance programs. To initiate this process, the 
committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States 
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees, the 
Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, and the Committee 
on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, not later 
than January 28, 2016, on an inventory of Department of Defense 
security cooperation programs intended to build partner 
security capabilities. The inventory should include, but is not 
limited to, the following:
    (1) The name of the program;
    (2) The program's goals, objectives, and activities;
    (3) The executive branch organizations with responsibility 
for implementing the program;
    (4) The legislative authority for the program; and
    (5) The amount of funds expended for the program in each of 
the past 3 fiscal years.

    Department of Defense Training Programs on Military Justice and 
                             Accountability

    As the Department of Defense's military operations 
increasingly focus on training and developing other nation's 
security forces across the globe, it is critical that these 
efforts include establishing the capacity within these forces 
to prevent the commission of unlawful acts and to pursue 
military justice and accountability in cases when members of 
the partner forces violate local or international law. The 
committee is concerned that a lack of emphasis on these core 
values could materialize and erode all that the U.S. has 
accomplished through its training programs.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General to evaluate 
the Department's efforts to promote the capacity and will of 
partner security forces to carry out internal military justice 
and accountability functions. The Comptroller General should 
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by 
March 1, 2016, on preliminary results with a followup report to 
follow on a date agreed to at the time of briefing. The 
assessment should address the following:
    (1) An identification of the statutory authorities, 
applicable doctrine (including field manuals), strategic 
guidance and programs the Department of Defense currently 
utilizes to implement military justice and accountability 
training efforts;
    (2) The preparedness of U.S. forces to conduct military 
justice and accountability training, including the necessary 
training, skills and resources;
    (3) A list of the countries receiving U.S. security 
assistance to develop internal military justice and 
accountability functions and the total dollar amount, by 
statutory authority or program, for the three preceding fiscal 
years.
    (4) An assessment of the ways in which the efforts of the 
Department of Defense to build military justice and 
accountability capacity and will of foreign security forces are 
part of overarching U.S. security assistance to those 
countries, including the integrated country strategies 
formulated by the Department of State.
    (5) The extent to which there are any statutory or other 
prohibitions on the provision of such assistance;
    (6) How the Department of Defense assesses the 
effectiveness of activities that are designed to promote 
military justice and accountability capacity in foreign 
security forces, including the extent to which enhanced 
capacity leads to greater accountability.
    (7) Any other issues the Comptroller General determines 
appropriate with respect to training foreign security forces on 
military justice and accountability.

          Foreign Military Financing in U.S. European Command

    The committee recognizes the significant contributions of 
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies and non-NATO 
partners to the International Security Assistance Force mission 
in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. The committee notes 
that the United States provided these allies and partners with 
military equipment over the course of the mission in 
Afghanistan that they are now bringing home, but is concerned 
about their ability to sustain this equipment to ensure it is 
available to meet urgent and emerging security challenges. As 
noted by the Commander of U.S. European Command (EUCOM) in 
written testimony provided to the committee in February 2015, 
``the U.S. needs to be prepared to assist these countries, as 
appropriate, with sustainment of U.S.-provided systems. The 
only U.S. government program with this ability is Foreign 
Military Financing (FMF), which has been reduced for the EUCOM 
AOR [area of responsibility] (not including Israel), by more 
than 50 percent since fiscal year 2010. Congressional support 
for an increase in FMF for the European and Eurasian region 
would greatly assist in helping to address this sustainment 
challenge.'' The committee shares the commander's assessment 
and encourages the Secretary of State, in consultation with the 
Secretary of Defense, to prioritize FMF funding for the EUCOM 
AOR to support the sustainment of U.S.-provided systems.

             Guidelines for U.S.-Japan Defense Cooperation

    The committee is aware that the Governments of the United 
States and Japan are currently working towards finalizing a 
revision to the Guidelines for U.S.-Japan Defense Cooperation, 
which were last updated in 1997. In October 2014, the United 
States and Japan issued a joint interim report on the revised 
guidelines that summarized the intent of both governments to 
modernize their bilateral security relationship to reflect 
current and emerging security challenges, a greater 
contribution by Japan to the U.S.-Japan security alliance, and 
expanded cooperation in areas such as space, cyber, maritime 
security, and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance.
    The committee supports efforts by both governments to 
update these defense cooperation guidelines. It recognizes 
that, since 1997, the security environment in East Asia has 
changed substantially. Similarly, the committee also recognizes 
that Japan has enhanced its self-defense capabilities and 
capacities since 1997, and appreciates the contributions Japan 
continues to make to promote security in the region and 
globally, particularly in areas such as peacekeeping 
operations, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, and 
maritime security. The committee further commends the 
Government of Japan for its July 2014 policy decision regarding 
collective self-defense, which will enable Japanese Self-
Defense Forces to engage in a wider range of defense operations 
and complement ongoing efforts to update bilateral guidelines 
for defense cooperation.
    The committee seeks to ensure that the updated guidelines 
will endure and that the Department of Defense takes necessary 
actions to implement the guidelines relevant to the Department 
once they are finalized. Therefore, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing not later than 
September 11, 2015, to the House Committee on Armed Services on 
the Department's plans for implementing the guidelines. The 
briefing should include a discussion of the specific 
implementation measures the Department plans to take; any 
changes in the Department's roles, responsibilities, and 
missions with respect to the bilateral security alliance; and 
any changes to U.S. military posture, capabilities, and 
investments that would be required to support the revised 
guidelines.

                      Multilateral Sales to Allies

    The committee is aware that the Department of State and the 
Department of Defense, acting through the Defense Security 
Cooperation Agency (DSCA), recently initiated a Lead-Nation 
Procurement Initiative. This initiative would allow North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member countries and NATO 
organizations, acting as a lead-nation, to procure defense 
capabilities on behalf of others through foreign military 
sales. The committee understands that this initiative may help 
maximize NATO allies' defense budgets by enabling them to pool 
resources to acquire, develop, operate, and maintain shared 
defense capabilities. The committee notes that proposals for 
such procurements will be considered on a case-by-case basis 
for a 2-year trial period, and that lessons learned from this 
trial period will inform the potential development of more 
permanent policies to govern such transactions.
    The committee is dedicated to ensuring the security of NATO 
allies and other U.S. partners in Europe. This security is 
often contingent on the ability of NATO allies and other 
European partners to acquire, maintain, and operate significant 
military equipment and other defensive military articles. The 
committee notes that the Lead-Nation Procurement Initiative is 
a potential mechanism which allows the United States to 
increase desired foreign military support in Europe.
    The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to 
monitor the Lead-Nation Procurement Initiative and to keep the 
committee informed on the results of the initiative's 2-year 
trial period.

                National Guard State Partnership Program

    The budget request contained $5.6 million for the National 
Guard State Partnership Program (SPP).
    The committee supports the role of SPP in Department of 
Defense security cooperation efforts. Section 1205 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public 
Law 113-66) authorized SPP until September 30, 2016. Elsewhere 
in this Act, the committee would extend the authority of the 
program by 2 years.
    In its fiscal year 2016 unfunded priority list, the 
National Guard identified unfunded requirements totaling $7.0 
million in SPP activities. Therefore, the committee recommends 
$12.6 million, an increase of $7.0 million, for the National 
Guard State Partnership Program. The committee notes, however, 
that section 1205(e)(2) of Public Law 113-66 required the 
Department to submit an annual report to Congress that 
included, among other matters, a summary of expenditures. The 
committee urges the Department to ensure Congress receives 
information in a timely manner on the costs to plan, execute, 
and administer SPP.

                 Nonlethal Military Support for Ukraine

    The committee notes that Congress has provided the 
President with the authority to provide increased military 
assistance for the Government of Ukraine, most recently in 
section 6 of the Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014 (Public 
Law 113-272) and in section 1535 of the Carl Levin and Howard 
P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291), which authorized $75.0 
million in assistance to Ukraine as part of the Department of 
Defense's European Reassurance Initiative (ERI). The committee 
further notes that, to date, the security assistance provided 
by the United States to the Government of Ukraine has been 
nonlethal assistance, including the March 2015 announcement 
that $75.0 million in ERI funds would be allocated to provide 
additional nonlethal equipment to Ukraine, including 
communications equipment, medical supplies, and force 
protection enablers.
    The committee believes that defensive weapons and training 
are also necessary to enhance the defense of Ukraine, and 
elsewhere in this Act, it includes a provision that would 
authorize the Secretary of Defense, in concurrence with the 
Secretary of State, to provide assistance and sustainment to 
the military and national security forces of Ukraine, including 
the provision of lethal weapons of a defensive nature. However, 
the committee also recognizes that the United States must 
continue to provide nonlethal assistance as well to improve 
other aspects of the performance and professionalization of the 
Ukrainian Armed Forces.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to undertake a review of other, non-weapons-related activities 
that could enhance the performance and professionalization of 
the Ukrainian Armed Forces. In conducting such a review, the 
committee believes that the Secretary should consider the 
following areas: (1) logistics and transportation; (2) 
maintenance; (3) medical evacuation and treatment; (4) 
intelligence collection and analysis; (5) battlefield command 
and control; (6) counterintelligence; (7) institutional 
capacity building at the ministerial level; and (8) any other 
areas the Secretary considers important. The committee further 
directs the Secretary to provide a briefing to the House 
Committee on Armed Services not later than September 30, 2015, 
on the results of the review.

                      Operation United Assistance

    The committee is pleased with the effectiveness and 
responsiveness of the Department of Defense in its support to 
Operation United Assistance to combat the Ebola Virus Disease 
(EVD) in West Africa. The committee recognizes that the 
Department provides unique capabilities, including command and 
control, air- and sea-lift, construction, and training, that 
other U.S. Government agencies and international organizations 
are less able to provide. In a matter of weeks, the Department, 
under the leadership of the United States Agency for 
International Development, was able to assist in curbing the 
EVD outbreak in the Republic of Liberia. The Department built 
10 Ebola Treatment Units in the Republic of Liberia; performed 
command and control out of Monrovia, Liberia; trained over 
1,500 Liberian health care workers in precautionary safety 
measures for treating EVD patients; supplied mobile 
laboratories and personnel to diagnose EVD; and built the 
Monrovia Medical Unit to treat health care workers diagnosed 
with EVD. All of these tasks contributed to the international 
effort to quickly and efficiently bring the EVD epidemic under 
control.
    While the committee believes pandemics are a national 
security concern, it recognizes that the Department is not, and 
should not be, the lead agency for monitoring and detecting 
them, or for building the capacity of other nations to combat 
them. However, the committee also recognizes that the U.S. 
Government will likely call on the Department of Defense in 
future outbreaks of EVD and other diseases to provide 
assistance similar to that provided as part of Operation United 
Assistance. Therefore, the committee encourages the Department 
to remain engaged with other relevant U.S. Government and 
international agencies as they capture lessons learned from 
Operation United Assistance, and to support building capacity 
and monitoring systems in Africa to allow for faster and more 
effective responses in the future.
    Lastly, the committee commends the leadership and fortitude 
of the over 3,000 men and women in uniform who exhibited 
professionalism and courage as they performed their tasks in a 
challenging environment.

     Oversight of Assistance to the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan

    The committee applauds the positive agenda that President 
Ashraf Ghani initiated upon his recent election as president of 
the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, including a commitment to 
fight corruption, support women's rights, ensure that Afghan 
government institutions are effective, and initiate political 
reform. However, the committee continues to be concerned about 
the current state of these issues in Afghanistan.
    Additionally, the committee notes that not less than $25.0 
million in Afghanistan Security Forces Fund were made available 
in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 
(Public Law 113-66) for the programs and activities to support 
the recruitment, integration, retention, training, and 
treatment of women in the Afghanistan National Security Forces.
    The committee also notes that the Department of Defense 
Inspector General (DOD IG) was recently appointed by the 
Council of Inspectors General to be the lead IG for oversight 
of U.S. assistance in Afghanistan. The DOD IG should serve as 
the focal point for all IG inspections and oversight in 
Afghanistan. Further, the committee believes that the United 
States should continually review the progress that is being 
made within the Government of Afghanistan against corruption 
and should evaluate the steps that the Government of 
Afghanistan is taking to diminish corruption as part of any 
assessment of continued U.S. assistance.

      Report on Government Police Training and Equipping Programs

    In 2012, the committee received a one-time Presidential 
report on U.S. Government police training and equipping 
programs outside the United States, consistent with the 
requirements in section 1235(c) of the Ike Skelton National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-
383).
    The committee acknowledges the value of this report in 
providing the relevant congressional committees with a 
comprehensive, whole-of-government survey and assessment of 
programs that the United States utilizes in training and 
equipping foreign police forces. Therefore, the committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the 
Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the 
Attorney General of the United States, to submit an update to 
this report to the congressional defense committees, the House 
Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Senate Committee on Foreign 
Relations, the House Committee on Homeland Security, the Senate 
Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, the 
House Committee on the Judiciary, and the Senate Committee on 
the Judiciary by March 1, 2016, on U.S. Government police 
training and equipping programs outside the United States. The 
report shall include the following:
    (1) A list of all U.S. Government departments and agencies 
involved in implementing police training and equipping 
programs;
    (2) A description of the scope, size, and components of all 
police training and equipping programs for fiscal years 2015 
and 2016, to include: (a) the name of each country that 
received assistance under the program; (b) for each training 
activity, the number of foreign personnel provided training, 
their units of operation, location of the training, cost of the 
activity, the U.S. unit involved, and the nationality and unit 
of non-U.S. training personnel (if any) involved in each 
activity; (c) the purpose and objectives of the program; (d) 
the funding and personnel levels for the program in each such 
fiscal year; (e) the authority under which the program is 
conducted; (f) the name of the U.S. Government department or 
agency with lead responsibility for the program and the 
mechanisms for oversight of the program; and (g) the metrics 
for measuring the results of the program;
    (3) An assessment of the requirements for police training 
and equipping programs, and what changes, if any, are required 
to improve the capacity of the U.S. Government to meet such 
requirements;
    (4) An evaluation of the appropriate role of U.S. 
Government departments and agencies in coordinating on and 
carrying out police training and equipping programs;
    (5) An evaluation of the appropriate role of contractors in 
carrying out police training and equipping programs, and what 
modifications, if any, are needed to improve oversight of such 
contractors; and
    (6) Recommendations for legislative modifications, if any, 
to existing authorities relating to police training and 
equipping programs.
    The report shall be delivered in unclassified form, that is 
made available to the public, and may include a classified 
annex, if necessary.
    Lastly, the committee commends the work of the U.S. 
Government to train, equip, and build partnership capacities 
with its allies and partners across the globe.

                     Russian Unconventional Warfare

    Tactics employed by the Russian Federation in its 
aggression against Ukraine are not unique. However, Russia has 
combined them in new, effective, and troubling ways. It has 
fomented and taken advantage of ethnic disputes to train, 
build, and equip a separatist army in Ukraine under Russian 
direction. It has combined this line of effort with propaganda, 
diplomatic, and economic measures to try to reduce the 
effectiveness of Ukraine's response, as well as the response of 
the United States and Europe, and to preserve and extend its 
perceived sphere of influence.
    The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is the most 
successful military alliance in history, defending the security 
interests of its members against external threats for over 60 
years. The committee supports the NATO alliance and believes 
that it can successfully continue to serve as a bedrock for 
U.S. and European security. However, the committee notes that 
the methods currently being used by Russia in Ukraine pose a 
challenge to the NATO system.
    The core of the NATO alliance is provided by Article 5 of 
the Washington Treaty, which enshrines the principle of 
collective self-defense: ``The Parties agree that an armed 
attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America 
shall be considered an attack against them all . . .'' In the 
wake of Russian actions in Ukraine, both the United States, in 
a series of bilateral actions referred to as the European 
Reassurance Initiative, and NATO collectively, in the Readiness 
Action Plan, have taken steps to ensure that all parties are 
postured to respond to any new aggression. The committee is 
concerned, however, that these steps may not sufficiently 
address the challenges posed by Russian tactics.
    At its core, collective self-defense requires that the 
parties to the treaty agree that one of the members is under 
attack. This implies that such aggression can be correctly 
attributed to some actor outside the alliance. Russia's actions 
have been designed to be deniable and difficult to attribute 
directly to Russian government activity. Should similar 
tactics, or even more covert methods, be applied to NATO member 
states that border Russia, it may be difficult to attribute 
them to Russian activity and therefore difficult to trigger a 
collective NATO response. It is likely that some NATO members 
will have different views on the degree of Russian involvement. 
In addition, it is possible that Russia would perceive NATO may 
have difficulty in coming to an agreement about a collective 
response, which could undermine NATO's ability to deter Russia 
from engaging in attempts to intervene in sovereign issues of 
NATO members.
    The committee believes that the Department of Defense, and 
NATO, should fully explore how the United States, NATO, and 
member states can, as necessary, establish deterrence 
mechanisms against activities such as those undertaken by the 
Russian government in Ukraine. The committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Office of Net 
Assessment or other such organization as the Secretary 
considers appropriate, to undertake a study exploring various 
strategies for deterring external efforts to interfere with the 
internal workings of NATO member states by Russia, or any other 
actor utilizing tactics such as propaganda in media, economic 
warfare, cyber warfare, criminal acts, and intelligence 
operations, similar to those being used by Russia in Ukraine. 
The committee expects the Secretary to deliver a report to the 
congressional defense committees containing the findings of 
such study not later than March 31, 2016.
    This study would complement a provision contained elsewhere 
in this Act requiring the Secretary of Defense to develop a 
strategy for the Department of Defense to counter 
unconventional warfare threats posed by adversarial state and 
non-state actors.

  Support to Coalition Partners Conducting Military Operations within 
                       Operation Inherent Resolve

    Coalition countries, conducting military operations as part 
of Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR), have requested specific 
U.S. military assets and assistance to support their efforts to 
counter the threat presented by the Islamic State of Iraq and 
the Levant in the Middle East and elsewhere. The committee 
values the contributions of these countries and urges the 
Department of Defense to continue consideration of their 
requests. The committee also recognizes that some of these 
coalition countries, including the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan 
and the United Arab Emirates, have requested unmanned aerial 
systems (UAS) capability.
    The committee notes that on February 17, 2015, the United 
States announced a new export policy for military unmanned 
aerial systems. The new policy permits the export of Missile 
Technology Control Regime (MTCR) Category I intelligence, 
surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) UAS and Unmanned Combat 
Aerial Vehicles, subject to case-by-case interagency reviews 
and consistent with all applicable U.S. law and policy, 
including those related to the State of Israel's Qualitative 
Military Edge and MTCR international commitments.
    Consistent with UAS policy guidelines, the committee 
supports the sale, lease, or transfer of U.S.-origin UAS, 
including Category I systems, to those friends and allies in 
the Middle East whose military requirements demand persistent 
ISR assets. The committee notes that appropriate sale, lease, 
or transfer of UAS technology can help build the capacity of 
partner nation military forces, foster interoperability with 
the United States, support critical counterterrorism 
objectives, and sustain the U.S. defense industrial base. In 
this context, the committee urges the interagency to review all 
such outstanding letters of request or license applications for 
the export of such systems.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in 
coordination with the Secretary of State, to provide a briefing 
to the House Committee on Armed Services and the House 
Committee on Foreign Affairs not later than September 15, 2015, 
on all pending requests from Jordan, and other Middle Eastern 
countries that are contributing to OIR, for the sale, lease, or 
transfer of UAS systems. The briefing should include the dates 
that requests were received, specific issues under 
consideration, and time horizon for completing a review of each 
request.

  The Transition or Termination of the Mission to Counter the Lord's 
                            Resistance Army

    The committee continues to closely monitor the mission to 
apprehend or remove Joseph Kony, the leader of the Lord's 
Resistance Army (LRA), from the battlefield, which is otherwise 
known as the Counter-LRA mission.
    Section 1208 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66) authorized the Secretary 
of Defense, with the concurrence of Secretary of State, to 
provide logistic support, supplies, and services, and 
intelligence support, to foreign forces participating in 
operations to mitigate and eliminate the threat posed by the 
LRA, through September 30, 2017. However, the committee remains 
concerned that the Secretary of Defense has not provided to the 
committee details on its plan to transition or terminate the 
Counter-LRA mission should Joseph Kony be apprehended or 
removed from the battlefield or when the authority expires.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to brief the 
House Committee on Armed Services by September 30, 2015, on the 
transition plan for the Counter-LRA mission, to include 
addressing the transition or termination plan for the Counter-
LRA mission; the authorities that would be required in any 
transition; and how the authorized resources would be utilized 
following any transition or termination of the Counter-LRA 
mission.

 The Utilization of General Purpose Forces to Meet U.S. Africa Command 
                              Requirements

    The committee notes the importance and value of engagements 
with militaries of friendly foreign nations on the continent of 
Africa. These engagements can provide critical training for 
such militaries, as well as host nation familiarity with U.S. 
forces that could be useful in the event that the U.S. military 
finds itself conducting operations in Africa.
    To that end, section 1203 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66) 
authorized the General Purpose Forces (GPF) of the United 
States military to conduct training with military and other 
security forces of friendly foreign countries. This authority 
was requested by the Secretary of Defense and, at the time, was 
presented as a way to meet the requirements of the commander of 
U.S. Africa Command.
    However, to date, this authority has been utilized only 
once on the continent of Africa. On February 6, 2015, the Under 
Secretary of Defense for Policy provided a letter to the 
committee that stated this authority would be utilized for a 
training event in the Republic of Zambia and that the 
incremental expenses would not exceed $4,000. The committee 
believes this authority has not been employed to meet the 
requirements of the commander of the U.S. Africa Command. 
Additionally, the committee believes that because this 
authority has only been used once, the Department of Defense 
has not established a record that would support a request for 
extension or re-authorization.
    This authority does not terminate until September 30, 2017. 
Additionally, the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public 
Law 113-291) authorized the Counterterrorism Partnerships Fund 
(CTPF), which could provide funding for this authority. The 
committee believes that through this authority and the CTPF, 
the Secretary of Defense could further achieve the training and 
military engagement requirements of the commander of U.S. 
Africa Command.

                  U.S.-Philippines Defense Cooperation

    The committee notes that in April 2014, the Governments of 
the United States and the Republic of the Philippines announced 
a bilateral Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement. This 10-
year agreement, building upon the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty, 
would facilitate the enhanced rotational presence of U.S. 
forces, expand opportunities for joint military training and 
exercises, and support the long-term modernization of the 
Philippine military. It would also provide for greater U.S. 
presence in the region to reassure allies and partners and to 
monitor U.S. interests, particularly freedom of navigation in 
the South China Sea.
    The committee welcomes the enhancement of defense 
cooperation with the Philippines and the expansion of bilateral 
military training opportunities. The committee also recognizes 
the willingness of the Philippines to host U.S. forces on a 
rotational basis as a strong signal of its commitment to the 
bilateral strategic partnership. It further supports efforts to 
modernize the Armed Forces of the Philippines and to strengthen 
their maritime security, maritime domain awareness, and 
humanitarian assistance and disaster relief capabilities, so 
that they can enhance their defensive capabilities and provide 
a greater contribution to regional security and stability.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                  Subtitle A--Assistance and Training


 Section 1201--One-Year Extension of Logistical Support for Coalition 
      Forces Supporting Certain United States Military Operations

    This section would amend section 1234 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
181), as most recently amended by section 1223 of the Carl 
Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291), by 
authorizing the Secretary of Defense to provide supplies, 
services, transportation, and other logistical support to 
coalition forces supporting U.S. operations in the Republic of 
Iraq and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan during fiscal year 
2016.

 Section 1202--Strategic Framework for Department of Defense Security 
                              Cooperation

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense, in 
coordination with the Secretary of State, to develop a 
strategic framework for Department of Defense security 
cooperation to guide prioritization of resources and 
activities. This section would also require the Secretary of 
Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State, to submit 
a report on the strategic framework for security cooperation to 
the congressional defense committees, the Committee on Foreign 
Relations of the Senate, and the Committee on Foreign Affairs 
of the House of Representatives, not later than 90 days after 
enactment of this Act.
    The committee notes that key guiding documents for the 
Department of Defense emphasize security cooperation in 
general, and building partner capacity specifically, as a 
priority for the Department. For example, the Department of 
Defense 2012 strategic guidance, ``Sustaining U.S. Global 
Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defense,'' states that, 
``Building partnership capacity elsewhere in the world also 
remains important for sharing the costs and responsibilities of 
global leadership.'' Moreover, the Department's 2014 
Quadrennial Defense Review states that, as a pillar of defense 
strategy, the Department will ``Build security globally, in 
order to preserve regional stability, deter adversaries, 
support allies and partners, and cooperate with others to 
address common security challenges.'' The committee recognizes 
the Department's efforts to conduct a comprehensive review of 
its security assistance authorities. The committee supports the 
role of the U.S. Armed Forces in developing and maintaining the 
security capabilities of partner nations across a broad range 
of programs, but questions the extent to which the Department 
has established goals and a comprehensive strategy for its 
security cooperation efforts. Thus, the committee believes that 
a strategic framework for security cooperation is necessary. 
The committee recognizes these efforts should ideally be 
coordinated with the Department of State and other departments 
and agencies to achieve whole-of-government success in 
enhancing the security sectors of partner nations.

  Section 1203--Modification and Two-Year Extension of National Guard 
                       State Partnership Program

    This section would amend section 1205 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-
66) by modifying and extending the authorization for the 
National Guard State Partnership Program (SPP).
    This section would specify that SPP should support the 
national interests and security cooperation goals and 
objectives of the United States. This section would also revise 
the congressional notification requirements for SPP activities 
to make a technical adjustment to the underlying language.
    This section would require the Chief of the National Guard 
Bureau to establish, maintain, and update a list of core 
competencies, consistent with the roles and missions of the 
Armed Forces as established by the Secretary of Defense, to 
support SPP activities, and to submit the list of core 
competencies to the Secretary of Defense for approval.
    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
establish a Fund to administer and execute the funds authorized 
and appropriated for SPP, and to consider certain matters in 
the establishment of the Fund. It would further require the 
Secretary to include this Fund in future year budget requests.
    This section would revise the matters included in the SPP 
annual report and definitions of certain terms. Finally, this 
section would extend the authority of the program by two years, 
to September 30, 2018.
    The committee encourages the Department to keep it informed 
on progress toward establishing the Fund required in this 
section, including, at a minimum, an assessment of the extent 
to which the matters required for consideration will be 
included in the Fund, and whether new legislation will be 
required to establish the Fund.

 Section 1204--Extension of Authority for Non-Reciprocal Exchanges of 
   Defense Personnel Between the United States and Foreign Countries

    This section would amend section 1207(f) of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-
84) by extending the authorization for non-reciprocal exchanges 
of defense personnel between the United States and foreign 
countries for an additional 15 months, to December 31, 2017.

        Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Afghanistan and Pakistan


  Section 1211--Commanders' Emergency Response Program in Afghanistan

    This section would amend section 1201 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-
81), as most recently amended by section 1221 of the Carl Levin 
and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291), by extending for 
1 year the Commanders' Emergency Response Program in the 
Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and authorizing $5.0 million 
for fiscal year 2016.

Section 1212--Extension and Modification of Authority for Reimbursement 
  of Certain Coalition Nations for Support Provided to United States 
                          Military Operations

    This section would amend section 1233 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
181), as most recently amended by section 1222 of the Carl 
Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291), by 
extending the authority for reimbursement of coalition nations 
for support provided to the United States for military 
operations in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan through 
fiscal year 2016.
    Additionally, this section would extend, through September 
30, 2016, the requirement for the Secretary of Defense to 
notify the congressional defense committees, prior to making 
any reimbursement to the Government of the Islamic Republic of 
Pakistan, of any logistical, military, or other support that 
Pakistan provides to the United States.
    Further, this section would extend the requirement for the 
Secretary of Defense to certify, prior to providing 
reimbursement to Pakistan, that Pakistan is: maintaining 
security along the Ground Lines of Communications through 
Pakistan; taking demonstrable steps to support counterterrorism 
operations; disrupting cross-border attacks; and countering the 
threat of improvised explosive devices.
    Finally, this section would specify that, of the total 
amount of reimbursements and support authorized for Pakistan 
during fiscal year 2016 pursuant to section 1233(d)(1) of 
Public Law 110-181, as amended, $400.0 million would not be 
eligible for a national security waiver unless the Secretary of 
Defense certifies that Pakistan is conducting military 
operations against the Haqqani Network in North Waziristan, has 
prevented the Haqqani Network from using North Waziristan as a 
safe haven, and is actively coordinating with the Government of 
Afghanistan to restrict the movement of militants, such as the 
Haqqani Network, along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

Section 1213--Sense of Congress on United States Policy and Strategy in 
                              Afghanistan

    This section would express a sense of Congress on U.S. 
policy and strategy in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, 
including that: the United States continues to have vital 
national security interests in ensuring that Afghanistan 
remains stable and sovereign; the Afghan President should be 
applauded for his leadership; the U.S. President's decision to 
maintain 9,800 U.S. troops through all of 2015 is appropriate 
and should be supported by Congress; the U.S. President should 
withdraw U.S. troops only on a pace that is consistent with the 
ability of the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) to 
sustain itself and secure Afghanistan; the U.S. President 
should review maintaining the U.S. advisory mission beyond 
2016; the United States should provide monetary and advisory 
support to the ANSF through 2018; the ANSF should have the 
independent capability to prevent Al Qaeda, the Haqqani 
Network, and the Taliban from being able to conduct 
destabilizing attacks in Afghanistan or against the United 
States; and the United States should continue to vigorously 
conduct counterterrorism operations, including against the 
Haqqani Network, in Afghanistan beyond 2016.

 Section 1214--Extension of Authority to Acquire Products and Services 
   Produced in Countries along a Major Route of Supply to Afghanistan

    This section would extend section 801 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-
84), as most recently amended by section 832 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-
66), through December 31, 2016. The underlying authority 
provides for limiting competition for products or services that 
are from one or more countries along a major route of supply to 
Afghanistan or providing a preference for such a product or 
service, under certain circumstances.

 Section 1215--Extension of Authority to Transfer Defense Articles and 
    Provide Defense Services to the Military and Security Forces of 
                              Afghanistan

    This section would extend section 1222 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-
239), as amended by section 1231 of the Carl Levin and Howard 
P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291), for 1 year through 
December 31, 2016.
    This section also would extend the quarterly reporting 
requirement for this authority through March 31, 2017. 
Additionally, this section would authorize that, during fiscal 
years 2015-16, the excess defense articles transferred from the 
stocks of the Department of Defense to the military and 
security forces of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan will not 
be subject to the authorities and limitations set forth in 
section 561 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (Public Law 
87-195).

    Section 1216--Sense of Congress Regarding Assistance for Afghan 
           Translators, Interpreters, and Administrative Aids

    This section would express the sense of Congress that it is 
in the interest of the United States to continue to assist 
Afghan partners, and their immediate families, who have served 
as translators or interpreters and those who have performed 
sensitive and trusted activities for U.S. Armed Forces.

             Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Syria and Iraq


    Section 1221--Extension of Authority to Support Operations and 
        Activities of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq

    This section would amend and extend section 1215 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public 
Law 112-81), as most recently amended by section 1237 of the 
Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291), by 
extending the authority for the Office of Security Cooperation 
in Iraq (OSC-I) for 1 year through fiscal year 2016. This 
authority would allow the Secretary of Defense, with the 
concurrence of the Secretary of State, to authorize OSC-I to 
conduct training activities in support of the Iraqi Ministry of 
Defense and Counter Terrorism Service personnel at a base or 
facility of the Government of the Republic of Iraq in order to 
address capability gaps; integrate processes relating to 
intelligence, air power, combined arms, logistics, and 
maintenance; and manage and integrate defense-related 
institutions.
    This section would limit the total authorized funding for 
operations and activities for OSC-I to $143.0 million in fiscal 
year 2016. This section would also require the Secretary of 
Defense and the Secretary of State to submit to the 
congressional defense committees, the Committee on Foreign 
Relations of the Senate, and the Committee on Foreign Affairs 
of the House of Representatives a report within 180 days after 
the date of the enactment of this Act, on the activities of 
OSC-I, including how OSC-I integrates into Operation Inherent 
Resolve in Iraq.

Section 1222--Comprehensive Strategy for the Middle East and to Counter 
                           Islamic Extremism

    This section would express findings and a sense of Congress 
on United States strategy in the Middle East and the state of 
Islamic extremism, including that Islamic extremism is growing 
in the Greater Middle East; the Islamic Republic of Iran 
continues to be a leading state sponsor of terrorism in the 
Greater Middle East and across the globe; the Building 
Partnership Capacity approach and limited counterterrorism 
operations have had some positive effects in some locations but 
have not prevented the proliferation and violence of terrorist 
groups or instability in the Middle East; the United States 
should take a greater leadership role in fighting Islamic 
extremism; the United States remains an indispensable actor in 
the greater Middle East; and the President should ensure that 
U.S. Armed Forces remain forward postured in the region.
    Additionally, this section would require the Secretary of 
Defense to submit to the congressional defense committees, not 
later than February 15, 2016, a comprehensive strategy for the 
Middle East and to counter Islamic extremism, including a 
detailed description of the following: U.S. objectives; the 
roles and responsibilities of the Department of Defense in such 
strategy; actions to prevent the weakening and failing of 
states; actions to counter Islamic extremism globally; and a 
detailed definition of states and non-state actors the United 
States will address in order to counter Islamic extremism.

   Section 1223--Modification of Authority to Provide Assistance to 
            Counter the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
provide $715.0 million in fiscal year 2016 for assistance to 
the military and other security forces of, or associated with, 
the Government of the Republic of Iraq, including the Kurdish 
and tribal security forces or other local security forces with 
a national security mission. In addition, this section would 
require that not less than 25 percent of the fiscal year 2016 
funds be expended for direct assistance to the Kurdish 
Peshmerga, the Sunni tribal security forces with a national 
security mission, and the Iraqi Sunni National Guard. It would 
further require that not less than half of such funds be 
obligated and expended for the Kurdish Peshmerga.
    This section also would require the Secretary of Defense 
and the Secretary of State to submit to the congressional 
defense committees, the Committee on Foreign Relations of the 
Senate, and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of 
Representatives, an assessment of the extent to which the 
Government of Iraq is meeting certain conditions relating to 
political inclusion of ethnic and sectarian minorities within 
the security forces of Iraq. If the Secretary of Defense and 
the Secretary of State do not assess that the Government of 
Iraq has substantially achieved such conditions, the Secretary 
of Defense would be required to withhold fiscal year 2016 
assistance directly to the Government of Iraq. If the Secretary 
of Defense withholds such fiscal year 2016 assistance to the 
Government of Iraq, then the Secretary would be required to 
provide not less than 60 percent of all fiscal year 2016 
unobligated funds to the Kurdish Peshmerga, the Sunni tribal 
security forces with a national security mission, and the Iraqi 
Sunni National Guard.
    Finally, this section would require that the Kurdish 
Peshmerga, the Sunni tribal security forces with a national 
security mission, and the Iraqi Sunni National Guard be deemed 
a country, which would allow these security forces to directly 
receive assistance from the United States under this section, 
should the Secretary of Defense and Secretary of State not 
submit the assessment required by this section or submit an 
assessment that the Government of Iraq has not substantially 
met the conditions related to the requirements for assistance, 
as outlined in this section.

Section 1224--Report on United States Armed Forces Deployed in Support 
                     of Operation Inherent Resolve

    This section would express the sense of Congress that: (1) 
it should be a top priority to provide U.S. Armed Forces, 
deployed as part of Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR), with the 
necessary force protection and combat search and rescue (CSAR) 
support; (2) U.S. military CSAR, casualty evacuation, and 
medical support personnel should not be counted as part of any 
limitation on the number of ground forces for OIR; (3) military 
assets for OIR should be staged as far forward as possible and 
should not be subject to any limitation on the number of ground 
forces for OIR; and (4) the President, Secretary of Defense, 
and commanders on the ground in support of OIR should 
continuously evaluate the force protection and CSAR 
requirements to ensure that such requirements are sufficient 
and are optimally postured.
    This section also would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit to the congressional defense committees a report, 30 
days after the date of the enactment of this Act and every 90 
days thereafter, on the U.S. Armed Forces deployed in support 
of OIR, including: the total number of U.S. Armed Forces 
personnel deployed; the total number of U.S. Armed Forces 
personnel expected to be deployed; the total number of U.S. 
Armed Forces conducting force protection and CSAR; the 
authorities and limitations on such personnel; and any changes 
to the limitations, authorities, or U.S. policy. This section 
would terminate on the date that OIR terminates or 5 years 
after the date of enactment of this Act, whichever occurs 
earlier.

 Section 1225--Modification of Authority to Provide Assistance to the 
                        Vetted Syrian Opposition

    This section would amend section 1209 of the Carl Levin and 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) by striking 
subsection (f) and inserting a new subsection (f) that would 
authorize $531.5 million to be appropriated from Overseas 
Contingency Operations in title XV for fiscal year 2016 for the 
Syria Train and Equip Fund for assistance to the vetted 
opposition in the Syrian Arab Republic.
    The committee would authorize $600.0 million for the 
overall Syria Train and Equip program, which includes $531.5 
million for the Syria Train and Equip Fund, $25.8 million for 
costs that would be incurred by the Army for such program, and 
$42.8 million for costs that would be incurred by the Air Force 
for such program.
    The committee notes that the challenges associated with 
initiating the Syria train and equip program have been great. 
The committee remains concerned about the elongated nature of 
the timeline to start the training and equipping of the vetted 
Syrian opposition. The committee will continue to conduct 
rigorous oversight of how this program fits into the overall 
strategy for Operation Inherent Resolve to determine whether it 
will be able to effectively contribute to the fight against the 
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

    Section 1226--Assistance to the Government of Jordan for Border 
                          Security Operations

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense, with 
the concurrence of the Secretary of State, to provide 
assistance on a reimbursement basis to the Hashemite Kingdom of 
Jordan to support and enhance the efforts of its Armed Forces 
to sustain security along its border with the Syrian Arab 
Republic and the Republic of Iraq.
    This section would also authorize $300.0 million in support 
of this authority. Additionally, not later than 15 days before 
providing assistance, the Secretary of Defense would be 
required to provide to the congressional defense committees, 
the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, and the 
Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives a 
report that describes the type, amount, and timeline for 
assistance that would be provided.
    Lastly, under this section, the Secretary of Defense would 
not be authorized to enter into any contractual obligation to 
provide such assistance, and would not be able to provide 
assistance after December 31, 2016.

      Section 1227--Report on efforts of Turkey to fight terrorism

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a report to Congress, not later than 180 days after the 
date of the enactment of this Act, on the Republic of Turkey's 
bilateral and multilateral efforts to combat the flow of 
foreign fighters through its country to the Syrian Arab 
Republic; Turkey's relationship with Hamas, including its 
harboring of leaders of Hamas; and the efforts of Turkey to 
fight terrorism, including Turkey's military and humanitarian 
role in the coalition to combat the Islamic State of Iraq and 
the Levant.

                  Subtitle D--Matters Relating to Iran


   Section 1231--Extension of Annual Report on Military Power of Iran

    This section would amend section 1245 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-
84), as most recently amended by section 1277 of the Carl Levin 
and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291), by extending the 
annual report on the military power of the Islamic Republic of 
Iran to December 31, 2025, and adding a reporting requirement 
that provides an assessment of transfers of military equipment, 
technology, and training to Iran from non-Iranian sources.

  Section 1232--Sense of Congress on the Government of Iran's Nuclear 
               Program and its Malign Military Activities

    This section would set forth certain findings and express 
the sense of Congress on the Government of the Islamic Republic 
of Iran's nuclear program and its malign military activities. 
The sense of Congress includes that: Iran's illicit pursuit, 
development, or acquisition of a nuclear weapons capability and 
its malign military activities constitute a grave threat to 
regional stability and the national security interests of the 
United States and its allies and partners; Iran continues to 
expand its malign military activities in the Middle East and 
globally, which may well increase under a Comprehensive Joint 
Plan of Action (CJPOA); sanctions relief under the CJPOA will 
provide Iran the ability to increase funding for its ballistic 
missile development programs, acquisition of destabilizing 
types and amounts of conventional weapons, support for 
terrorism, and other malign activities throughout the Middle 
East and globally; U.S. bilateral and multilateral sanctions 
against Iran, once relieved, will be extremely difficult to 
reconstitute in response to Iranian violations of its 
international obligations; Iran would be an internationally-
approved nuclear threshold state under the framework of the 
CJPOA, which will likely lead to the proliferation of nuclear 
weapons across the Middle East; and Congress should review and 
assess all elements of any agreement entered into between the 
countries of the P5+1 (the United States, the United Kingdom of 
Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the French Republic, the 
Federal Republic of Germany, the Russian Federation, and the 
People's Republic of China) and Iran, and it should approve or 
disapprove of any sanctions relief that results from such an 
agreement.
    Further, this section would set forth that the United 
States must continue to support the defense of allies and 
partners in the region, including Israel, by strengthening 
ballistic missile defense capabilities and increasing security 
assistance; and that Congress supports efforts to reach a 
peaceful, diplomatic solution to permanently and verifiably end 
Iran's pursuit, development, and acquisition of a nuclear 
weapons capability, and it reaffirms that it is U.S. policy 
that Iran will not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapons 
capability and that all instruments of U.S. power must be 
considered to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
    Finally, this section would state that Congress reaffirms 
the rights of U.S. allies to exercise their legitimate right to 
self-defense against the Government of Iran.

Section 1233--Report on Military Posture Required in the Middle East to 
              Deter Iran from Developing a Nuclear Weapon

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a report to Congress, not later than 90 days after this 
Act, regarding the military posture required in the Middle East 
to deter the Islamic Republic of Iran from developing a nuclear 
weapon. The report would include a discussion of the military 
forces, bases, and capability required to maintain a military 
option to prevent Iran from achieving a nuclear weapon, counter 
Iran's military activities, and protect the U.S. military and 
other interests in the region.

         Subtitle E--Matters Relating to the Russian Federation


     Section 1241--Notifications and Updates Relating to Testing, 
  Production, Deployment, and Sale or Transfer to Other States or Non-
    State Actors of the Club-K Cruise Missile System by the Russian 
                               Federation

    This section would require quarterly notifications by the 
Secretary of Defense to the congressional defense committees on 
the testing, production, deployment, sale, or transfer to other 
states or non-state actors of the Club-K cruise missile system 
by the Russian Federation.
    This section would also require the Secretary of Defense to 
notify the congressional defense committees not later than 7 
days after the Secretary determines that there is reasonable 
belief that Russia has deployed, sold, or transferred the Club-
K cruise missile system to other states or non-state actors.
    Additionally, this section would require the Secretary to 
submit quarterly updates to the specified congressional 
committees on the coordination of allied responses to the 
deployment, sale, or transfer of the Club-K cruise missile 
system to other states or non-state actors by Russia.
    Lastly, this section would require the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff to develop a strategy to detect, defend 
against, and defeat the Club-K cruise missile system, including 
opportunities for allied contributions to such efforts based on 
consultations with them. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff would be required to submit the strategy to the 
congressional defense committees not later than September 30, 
2016. The committee encourages the Chairman to ensure such 
strategy includes an estimation of its costs, if implemented in 
whole or in part, as well as a military assessment of the risks 
of such system to the United States, its deployed Armed Forces, 
and its allies if deployed by Russia or by a non-state actor.
    The notification requirements in this section would sunset 
5 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Section 1242--Notifications of Deployment of Nuclear Weapons by Russian 
             Federation to Territory of Ukrainian Republic

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit to the appropriate congressional committees quarterly 
notifications on the status of the Russian Federation 
conducting exercises with, planning or preparing to deploy, or 
deploying certain weapon systems, including its nuclear 
weapons, onto the territory of the Ukrainian Republic.
    This section would also require prompt notification, not 
more than 7 days, after the Secretary determines that there 
exists reasonable grounds to believe that Russia has deployed 
certain weapon systems onto the territory of Ukraine.
    This section would further require the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff to develop a strategy to respond to the 
military threat posed by Russia deploying certain weapon 
systems into the territory of Ukraine, including opportunities 
for allied cooperation in developing such responses based on 
consultation with such allies. The Chairman would be required 
to submit the strategy to the congressional defense committees 
by September 30, 2016, along with the views of the Secretary of 
Defense.
    The notification requirement in this section would sunset 5 
years after the date of the enactment of the Act.

    Section 1243--Non-Compliance by the Russian Federation with its 
                    Obligations under the INF Treaty

    This section would express the sense of Congress concerning 
ongoing violations of arms control agreements and treaties with 
the United States by the Russian Federation. This section would 
also require notification to the appropriate congressional 
committees not later than 30 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act regarding Russia's continued violation of 
the Treaty on Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) or return 
to compliance with such treaty, and not later than 30 days 
after Russia takes any further actions related to the INF, 
including any steps to return to compliance with that treaty.
    This section would also require submission of a report by 
the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs 
of Staff to the appropriate congressional committees not later 
than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and 
every 120 days thereafter, on the status of discussions with 
allies of the United States on Russia's violation of the INF 
Treaty, including efforts to develop collective responses to 
said violation. This reporting requirement would sunset 5 years 
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
    Lastly, this section would require the President, if on the 
date of the enactment of this Act, Russia has not begun to 
return to full compliance with the INF treaty, to begin 
research and development of counter force and countervailing 
U.S. responses, based on recommendations of the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff to fill current military requirements and 
capability gaps, with a priority on capabilities that could be 
deployed in 2 years. Elsewhere in this Act, the committee 
recommends funds be authorized to be appropriated for the 
purpose of research and development of these capabilities in 
fiscal year 2016.
    With respect to the options to be considered using the 
funds that would be authorized by this provision, the committee 
notes the testimony of the Principal Deputy Under Secretary of 
Defense for Policy on December 10, 2014, that ``we are looking 
at a number of possible countermeasures in the military sphere, 
ranging from reactive defense to counterforce to countervailing 
defense measures. I don't want to get into the specifics 
because we are still working through various options, but we 
have a broad range of options, some of which would be compliant 
with the INF Treaty, some of which would not be, that we would 
be able to recommend to our leadership if a decision were taken 
to go down that path.''

 Section 1244--Modification of Notification and Assessment of Proposal 
   to Modify or Introduce New Aircraft or Sensors for Flight by the 
               Russian Federation under Open Skies Treaty

    This section would amend section 1242 of the Carl Levin and 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) by extending the 
number of days before notification to the stated congressional 
committees of the intention to approve a proposal of the 
Russian Federation with respect to the Open Skies Treaty from 
30 days to 90 days. This section would further amend section 
1242 to require the views of any relevant combatant commander 
to also be provided in the assessment required by the section.

  Section 1245--Sense of Congress on Support for Estonia, Latvia, and 
                               Lithuania

    This section would express a sense of Congress on U.S. 
support for the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Latvia, 
and the Republic of Lithuania, including support for their 
sovereignty, concern over aggressive military actions of the 
Russian Federation against these nations, and encouragement for 
further defense cooperation between the United States and these 
nations.

         Section 1246--Sense of Congress on Support for Georgia

    This section would express the sense of Congress on U.S. 
support for Georgia's sovereignty and territorial integrity as 
well as support for continued cooperation between the United 
States and Georgia.

        Subtitle F--Matters Relating to the Asia-Pacific Region


Section 1251--Sense of Congress Recognizing the 70th Anniversary of the 
        End of Allied Military Engagement in the Pacific Theater

    This section would express the sense of Congress 
recognizing the 70th anniversary of the end of the Allied 
military engagement in the Pacific theater, and the end of the 
Second World War. It would also express a series of findings 
highlighting key events related to the Second World War in the 
Pacific; recognize the tremendous sacrifice, bravery, and loss 
of U.S. and Allied Forces; and note the close alliance 
relationship that the United States and Japan have forged in 
the years since the war.

   Section 1252--Sense of Congress Regarding Consolidation of United 
              States Military Facilities in Okinawa, Japan

    This section would provide the sense of Congress that the 
Henoko location for the Futenma Replacement Facility has been 
studied and analyzed for several decades, reaffirmed by both 
the United States and Japan on several occasions, including the 
2010 Futenma Replacement Facility Bilateral Experts study and 
the independent assessment required by section 346 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public 
Law 112-81), and remains the only option for the Futenma 
Replacement Facility.

 Section 1253--Strategy to Promote United States Interests in the Indo-
                          Asia-Pacific Region

    This section would require the President to develop an 
overall strategy to promote United States interests in the 
Indo-Asia-Pacific region that is informed by the U.S. National 
Security Strategy, the Department of Defense strategy on 
prioritizing defense interests in the Asia-Pacific region as 
required by section 1251 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. 
``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291), and the Department of State 
strategy for a rebalancing of U.S. policy in Asia as required 
by section 7043 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 
(Public Law 113-76). This section would further require the 
President to issue a Presidential Policy Directive to relevant 
Federal departments and agencies that implement the required 
strategy, and require that the annual budget request submission 
to Congress include a description of how the programs and 
projects funded in the request align with the required 
strategy.
    The committee notes that the President has issued 
Presidential Policy Directives (PPD) containing strategies for 
other regions of the globe, to include a PPD on Political and 
Economic Reform in the Middle East and North Africa in 2011, 
and a PPD on U.S. Strategy for Sub-Saharan Africa in 2012. The 
committee believes that such a PPD containing a strategy for 
promoting U.S. interests in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region, which 
also includes specific implementing guidance to relevant 
Federal departments and agencies, will help bring focus and 
cohesiveness to, and establish priorities for, relevant 
interagency and organization-specific programs and projects.

  Section 1254--Sense of Congress on the United States Alliance with 
                                 Japan

    This section would express a sense of Congress on the U.S. 
alliance with Japan, including that the United States highly 
values the alliance with the Government of Japan, supports 
recent changes in Japanese defense policy and the new bilateral 
guidelines for U.S.-Japan defense cooperation, and reaffirms 
the U.S. commitment to the alliance.

                       Subtitle G--Other Matters


     Section 1261--Non-Conventional Assisted Recovery Capabilities

    This section would authorize a 1-year extension to the 
Department of Defense to continue to develop, manage, and 
execute a Non-Conventional Assisted Recovery personnel recovery 
program for isolated Department of Defense, U.S. Government, 
and other designated personnel supporting U.S. national 
interests worldwide. This section would allow the Secretary of 
Defense to use up to $25.0 million in funds authorized to be 
appropriated for the Department of Defense for operation and 
maintenance for such recovery program through fiscal year 2017.

  Section 1262--Amendment to the Annual Report under Arms Control and 
                            Disarmament Act

    This section would amend section 2539a of title 22, United 
States Code, regarding the requirement for the annual briefing 
on arms control compliance, also known as the ``Report on 
Adherence to and Compliance with Arms Control, 
Nonproliferation, and Disarmament Agreements and Commitments.''
    This section would modify the associated requirement for 
the President to brief certain congressional committees on the 
report, to require that in any year in which that report is not 
submitted by the statutorily required submission date of April 
15, the Director of National Intelligence shall provide a 
report, not later than June 15, detailing each instance of 
inconsistent behavior by a state party to an arms control 
treaty or related agreement to which the United States is a 
party.

     Section 1263--Permanent Authority for NATO Special Operations 
                              Headquarters

    This section would make permanent the authority for the 
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Special Operations 
Headquarters, as first authorized in section 1244(a) of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public 
Law 111-84).

   Section 1264--Extension of Authorization to Conduct Activities to 
  Enhance the Capability of Foreign Countries to Respond to Incidents 
                 Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction

    This section would extend the authority to conduct 
activities to enhance the capability of foreign countries to 
respond to incidents involving weapons of mass destruction from 
section 1204 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66) from 2017 to 2020.

    Section 1265--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Research, 
    Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force, for Arms Control 
                             Implementation

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense, in 
coordination with the Secretary of State, to submit to the 
specified committees of Congress a report on certain 
information related to the Open Skies Treaty prior to the 
obligation or expenditure of more than 50 percent of the funds 
authorized to be appropriated for research, development, test, 
and evaluation, Air Force (PE 35145F), for arms control 
implementation.

    Section 1266--Modification of Authority for Support of Special 
                     Operations to Combat Terrorism

    This section would modify the reporting requirement within 
section 1208(f)(1) of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375), as 
most recently amended by section 1202(c) of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-
84), from annual to biannual, and raise the authorized amount 
to $100.0 million. Given the increased focus on this authority 
and additional authorization amount of $100.0 million, the 
committee believes biannual reporting is required to ensure 
robust congressional oversight of this important authority.

   Section 1267--United States-Israel Anti-Tunnel Defense Cooperation

    This section would establish a cooperative program with the 
State of Israel to develop an anti-tunneling defense system to 
detect, map, and neutralize underground tunnels.

   Section 1268--Efforts of the Department of Defense to Prevent and 
               Respond to Gender-based Violence Globally

    This section would express a series of findings and a 
statement of policy on preventing and responding to gender-
based violence globally, and require the Secretary of Defense 
to continue implementation of the U.S. Strategy to Prevent and 
Respond to Gender-Based Violence Globally, as appropriate. 
Furthermore, it would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
provide training on such matters, and require the Secretary of 
Defense to submit a report to certain congressional committees 
on the Department of Defense's implementation efforts.

                TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION

                                OVERVIEW

    The budget request for the Department of Defense 
Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) Program contained $358.5 
million for fiscal year 2016. The request included $20.6 
million for the Global Nuclear Security (GNS) Program, $264.6 
million for the Cooperative Biological Engagement Program 
(CBEP), and $438.9 million for the Proliferation Prevention 
Program (PPP).
    The committee continues to support the goals of the CTR 
Program and believes that the program is important to United 
States national security.
    The committee notes that the CTR Cooperative Biological 
Engagement Program now encompasses 70 percent of the CTR budget 
request. The committee reaffirms its view, stated in the 
committee report (H. Rept. 111-491) accompanying the Ike 
Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2011, and reaffirmed in the two most recent committee reports 
accompanying the House of Representatives-passed national 
defense authorization acts, that biological threat reduction 
and engagement ``should be guided by a comprehensive long-term 
interagency engagement and coordination; rigorous Department 
management and oversight; coordination and integration with 
other Department programs and activities; and concrete metrics 
for measuring progress.'' The committee further reaffirms its 
view that the CTR Program as a whole should ``maintain a strong 
focus''' on the full range of threat reduction challenges. The 
committee continues to believe that concrete metrics remain 
important for measuring the impact and effectiveness of CBEP 
activities.
    Lastly, the committee welcomes efforts by the Department of 
Defense to actively consult with the committee and to keep it 
fully informed of efforts and developments in these areas.
    The committee recommends $358.5 million, the amount of the 
budget request, for the CTR Program. The committee believes 
that no CTR funds for fiscal year 2016 should be authorized for 
activities with the Russian Federation based on ongoing Russian 
aggression towards Ukraine, as provided in the Carl Levin and 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291).

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


   Section 1301--Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction Funds

    This section would define Cooperative Threat Reduction 
(CTR) programs and funds as those authorized to be appropriated 
in section 301 of this Act and made available by section 4301 
of this Act, and would specify that CTR funds shall remain 
available for obligation for 3 fiscal years.

                   Section 1302--Funding Allocations

    This section would allocate specific amounts for each 
program under the Department of Defense Cooperative Threat 
Reduction (CTR) program from within the overall $358.5 million 
that the committee would authorize for the CTR program. The 
allocation under this section reflects the amount of the budget 
request for fiscal year 2016.

                    TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


         Assessment of Current State of Global Tantalum Supply

    The committee has repeatedly expressed concern regarding 
supply chains for items critical to national security, such as 
rare earth materials, titanium, beryllium, ammonium 
perchlorate, and other materials. The committee understands 
that the Department of Defense may seek to procure up to 46,750 
pounds of tantalum for the National Defense Stockpile as stated 
in the Department's Annual Materials Plan for Fiscal Year 2016. 
The committee believes it is important to ensure a reliable 
supply of tantalum for the production of military electronics 
and capacitors, armor-piercing munitions, military turbine 
engines, and rocket motor nozzles.
    The committee is concerned about the reliability and 
transparency of the tantalum supply chain. As part of its 
biennial report on requirements, the National Defense Stockpile 
relies upon production data generated by the U.S. Geological 
Survey. While recent data from the U.S. Geological Survey 
states that 786 tonnes of tantalum was produced in 2013, 
industry publications indicate that global tantalum production 
was in excess of 1,500 tonnes in that year. This significant 
discrepancy is a serious concern for the committee, as the 
National Defense Stockpile's report may markedly underestimate 
global tantalum production and consumption.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to submit an assessment to the congressional defense 
committees by February 1, 2016, of the current state of the 
global tantalum supply chain, to include the following:
    (1) An assessment of global tantalum production from 
primary raw materials, slag materials, synthetic concentrates, 
and secondary materials;
    (2) A comparison and analysis of data available from 
industry and data generated during the preparation of the 
National Defense Stockpile's biennial requirements report for 
2015;
    (3) An assessment of the reliability of tantalum producers 
during national defense emergency scenarios analyzed in the 
National Defense Stockpile's biennial requirements report for 
2015; and
    (4) Any other elements the Comptroller General deems 
relevant to the assessment.

          Insufficient Working-Capital Fund Rate Calculations

    The committee has been concerned for a number of years that 
the determination of prices and rates for Defense Working-
Capital Fund activities is driven by an arbitrary, outdated 
goal of maintaining 7 to 10 days of cash to sustain business 
operations. This metric cannot respond to changes related to 
external pressures such as fluctuations in commodity markets 
that are outside of the Department of Defense's control.
    In the committee report (H. Rept. 111-166) accompanying the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, the 
committee directed the Secretary of Defense to provide a report 
examining a range of alternative cash balance parameters by 
which the revolving funds could be managed to sustain a single 
rate or price to the customer throughout the fiscal year. 
Having found this report to be insufficient, the committee 
mandated a study in section 1402 of the Ike Skelton National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-
383) requiring an independent review of each working capital 
fund within the Department to ascertain the appropriate cash 
corpus required to maintain good financial management of each 
fund. This study was thorough and informative but did not 
provide for change within management of the working capital 
funds. In the committee report (H. Rept. 112-479) accompanying 
the National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2013, 
the committee responded by recommending that the Department 
modify its Financial Management Regulations to adjust the range 
of the cash corpus required for fuel-related working capital 
funds to mitigate the continued fluctuation of rates charged to 
the customer during the fiscal year.
    In the committee report (H. Rept. 113-446) accompanying the 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015, the committee commended the Department 
for initiating processes to determine the correct cash corpus 
thresholds for each working-capital fund. In addition, the 
committee looked forward to future budget submissions with 
prices and rates set to maintain an adequate cash balance to 
absorb external pressures, thereby maintaining a steady, 
dependable rate for the customer throughout the fiscal year.
    However, the committee is dismayed to find that the fuel 
rates set within the budget request for fiscal year 2016 take a 
step back from this thoughtful calculation. Rather than 
assessing the current marketplace for fuel costs in this time 
of lower crude oil prices, the request merely footnotes the 
fact that the composite fuel rate for fiscal year 2015 was 
reduced on February 1, 2015, by $18.48, or 11.9 percent. This 
reduction was not accounted for in any of the decisions made by 
Defense Working-Capital Fund managers in the determination of 
fiscal year 2016 rates. In addition, the calculation of fuel 
rates is no longer based on estimated market prices for the 
upcoming fiscal year; rather, the rate is set on a 2009 funding 
level, adjusted for inflation. This basic rate calculation does 
not take into account the current cash balance of the fund and 
absolves working-capital fund managers of their responsibility 
of managing the fund. Accordingly, the committee recommends a 
reduction in the O&M budget for fiscal year 2016 as shown in 
section 4301 of this Act, and realigns those funds to support 
higher priority defense requirements throughout the Department.

                  Review of Electronic Waste Recycling

    The committee is aware that modern electronics contain many 
valuable recyclable materials, including strategic and critical 
materials and precious metals. The committee notes that through 
the proper disposal of end-of-life electronics used by the 
Department of Defense, these recyclable materials could be 
reclaimed for use in U.S. military programs. It is unclear, 
however, how the Department plans for, and executes this 
disposal process, leading to the possibility that significant 
quantities of these materials are being lost or wasted.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees not later than September 30, 2016, on the current 
state of electronic waste recycling by the Department of 
Defense. Such a report shall include:
    (1) Information on the disposition of used Department of 
Defense electronics, including the volume of electronics that 
are recycled, reused, refurbished, and demanufactured;
    (2) Information on the value of all strategic and critical 
materials, including precious metals, recovered from recycled 
electronics of the Department during fiscal years 2010-14;
    (3) Information on the economic models used by the 
Department for the collection and capture of strategic or 
critical materials from used electronics, including any 
benefits and challenges associated with the models; and
    (4) An identification and assessment of potential 
opportunities for improving the efficiency or effectiveness of 
the Department's efforts to recover strategic and critical 
materials from used Department of Defense electronics.

Review of Non-Navy Workload within Navy Working Capital Fund Activities

    The committee is aware of guidance issued by the Chief of 
Naval Operations to Navy Working Capital Funded entities, 
including the science and technology laboratories and test and 
evaluation centers, to increase the scrutiny of and elevate the 
approval levels for reimbursable work for other Federal 
agencies. The committee is concerned that an unintended 
consequence of such guidance is a failure to recognize how 
working capital funded entities operate and the value that 
outside, reimbursable work can have on reducing the overall 
rate structure for entities such as the naval warfare centers. 
The committee also believes that such a move could be 
detrimental to the overall efficiency of the Federal research 
and test enterprise by forcing other Federal partners to rely 
on contractors to provide these services or to build 
additional, redundant scientific and test capabilities. For 
example, the Department of Homeland Security works closely with 
the naval warfare centers to provide science, technology, test, 
and evaluation capabilities for its programs, and without that 
support, the Department of Homeland Security would have to 
devote a larger percentage of its research, development, test, 
and evaluation budget to providing those services itself.
    The committee is concerned that the aforementioned guidance 
could be affecting decisions at naval facilities, including the 
Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division (NAWCAD) and the 
Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC). The committee has received 
information from the Department of the Navy that NAWCAD has not 
rejected any Department of Homeland Security work; however, 
NAWCAD had identified one instance where a fiscal year 2014 
request by the Department of Homeland Security to extend the 
period of performance of an existing effort did not continue. 
Additionally, work valued at $3.7 million to procure and 
install runway lighting systems for the New York Port Authority 
was rejected in fiscal year 2014 because it was deemed not to 
be within the NAWCAD mission area.
    To understand the nature of the impact this guidance might 
have on operations and budget requests of Navy Working Capital 
Fund entities, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy, 
in coordination with the Chief of Naval Operations, to provide 
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by November 
1, 2015, commenting on all discrepancies between the budgeted 
position and actual workload, as presented in the President's 
budget request for each fiscal year from 2012-15 for each 
subcategory under ``Other Orders'' as shown in the Sources of 
New Orders and Revenue budget display. The briefing shall 
include a discussion of the discrepancies, to include the 
rationale for refusing any workload from these entities.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                     Subtitle A--Military Programs


                  Section 1401--Working Capital Funds

    This section would authorize appropriations for Defense 
Working Capital Funds at the levels identified in section 4501 
of division D of this Act.

              Section 1402--National Defense Sealift Fund

    This section would authorize appropriations for the 
National Defense Sealift Fund at the levels identified in 
section 4501 of division D of this Act.

    Section 1403--Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense

    This section would authorize appropriations for Chemical 
Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense at the levels 
identified in section 4501 of division D of this Act.

 Section 1404--Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-
                                  Wide

    This section would authorize appropriations for Drug 
Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-Wide at the 
levels identified in section 4501 of division D of this Act.

                Section 1405--Defense Inspector General

    This section would authorize appropriations for the Office 
of the Inspector General at the levels identified in section 
4501 of division D of this Act.

                  Section 1406--Defense Health Program

    This section would authorize appropriations for the Defense 
Health Program at the levels identified in section 4501 of 
division D of this Act.

            Section 1407--National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund

    This section would authorize appropriations for the 
National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund at the levels identified in 
section 4501 of division D of this Act.

                 Subtitle B--National Defense Stockpile


   Section 1411--Extension of Date for Completion of Destruction of 
       Existing Stockpile of Lethal Chemical Agents and Munitions

    This section would modify section 1412(b)(3) of the 
Department of Defense Authorization Act, 1986 (Public Law 99-
45) by extending the stockpile elimination deadline from 
December 31, 2017, to December 31, 2023.

                   Subtitle C--Working-Capital Funds


Section 1421--Limitation on Furlough of Department of Defense Employees 
                   Paid Through Working-Capital Funds

    This section would prohibit the furlough of Department of 
Defense employees paid through working capital funds unless the 
Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of a military department 
determines that the working capital fund is insolvent or there 
are insufficient funds to pay working capital fund labor costs 
of the employee. This section would also provide the authority 
for the Secretary concerned to waive the prohibition in the 
interest of national security.

Section 1422--Working-Capital Fund Reserve Account for Petroleum Market 
                           Price Fluctuations

    This section would amend section 2208 of title 10, United 
States Code, by adding a new subsection that establishes a 
reserve account within the Defense Working Capital Fund to 
provide fund managers a contingency account for sudden 
fluctuations in market rates for petroleum. With the volatility 
of the current fuel market, the committee believes setting fuel 
rates up to 18 months prior to execution is a difficult and 
imprecise action. This account would allow fund managers to 
maintain the standard price for fuel to customers when market 
prices suddenly increase, which the committee believes would 
keep operation and maintenance accounts unaffected during the 
year of execution.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters


 Section 1431--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

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
transfer funds from the Defense Health Program to the Joint 
Department of Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs Medical 
Facility Demonstration Fund created by section 1704 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public 
Law 111-84).

    Section 1432--Authorization of Appropriations for Armed Forces 
                            Retirement Home

    This section would authorize $64.3 million to be 
appropriated for the operation of the Armed Forces Retirement 
Home during fiscal year 2016.

   TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR OVERSEAS 
                         CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS

                                OVERVIEW

    The committee notes that section 1008 of the John Warner 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public 
Law 109-364) requires the budget submission to Congress for 
each fiscal year to include:
    (1) A request for the appropriation of funds for ongoing 
operations in the Republic of Iraq and the Islamic Republic of 
Afghanistan;
    (2) An estimate of all funds expected to be required in 
that fiscal year for operations; and
    (3) A detailed justification of the funds requested.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations to 
be available upon enactment of this Act to support overseas 
contingency operations. These authorizations support, but are 
not limited to, current operations against the Islamic State of 
Iraq and the Levant (ISIL); enhanced security and military 
capabilities for countries in the region to include Jordan, a 
key member of the coalition against ISIL; increased assistance 
and sustainment to the military and national security forces of 
Ukraine to deter Russian aggression; reassurance and support 
for our allies and partners; and continued support for the 
Afghanistan National Security Forces to support stability and 
security in Afghanistan.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                   Counterterrorism Partnerships Fund

    The committee notes that the Carl Levin and Howard P. 
``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) authorized the Secretary of 
Defense to provide assistance to foreign security forces and to 
improve the capacity of the U.S. Armed Forces in the U.S. 
Central Command and U.S. Africa Command areas of responsibility 
under the Counterterrorism Partnerships Fund (CTPF). Public Law 
113-291 also authorized $1.30 billion for this fund.
    The budget request contained $2.10 billion in Overseas 
Contingency Operations funding for the CTPF. However, the 
committee is concerned that the Secretary of Defense has not 
provided the plan for CTPF, as required by section 1534 of 
Public Law 113-291, and has not devised a strategy for this 
fund. Given the complexities of the CTPF, the nascent stage of 
the execution of the fiscal year 2015 CTPF authorization, and 
that no funds have been obligated or executed under the fiscal 
year 2015 CTPF authorization, the committee recommends not 
authorizing a fiscal year 2016 CTPF. Elsewhere in this Act, the 
committee realigns such CTPF funds to areas in which the 
requirements have been determined.
    The committee intends to conduct close and thorough 
oversight of the fiscal year 2015 CTPF authorization in order 
to ensure that: (1) the CTPF serves the purpose that the 
Secretary of Defense envisions for this fund; (2) the CTPF is 
executed consistent with the fiscal year 2015 CTPF 
authorization; and (3) the Department of Defense is able to 
execute the fiscal year 2015 CTPF authorized funding 
effectively.

      Funding and Support for the European Reassurance Initiative

    The budget request included $789.3 million for the European 
Reassurance Initiative (ERI). The committee supports the policy 
and activities contained in the ERI, which was originally 
proposed as part of the budget request for fiscal year 2015. 
However, the committee observes that these initiatives are 
largely focused on conventional reassurance and deterrence 
activities. The committee also recognizes that the Russian 
Federation has employed unconventional warfare methods in areas 
such as cyber warfare, economic warfare, information 
operations, and intelligence operations, and believes the 
Department of Defense should increase its focus on countering 
such methods.
    The committee believes that ERI funds for fiscal year 2016 
should be allocated for continued conventional reassurance and 
deterrence activities, as outlined in section 1535 of the Carl 
Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291), as 
well as countering unconventional threats. Therefore, elsewhere 
in this Act, the committee includes a provision that would: (1) 
lay out a statement of policy regarding ERI; (2) require a 
Department of Defense strategy to address unconventional 
warfare methods; and (3) authorize increased funding for U.S. 
intelligence and warning capabilities related to the European 
theater, technologies supporting U.S. information operations 
and strategic communications activities, the Javelin weapon 
system, and Stryker combat vehicle upgrades to meet U.S. Army 
Europe operational needs.
    The committee further believes that, as part of the U.S. 
effort to increase security assistance to allies and partners 
in Europe, ERI funds should be allocated to provide both 
nonlethal equipment and lethal equipment of a defensive nature 
to Ukraine. Therefore, elsewhere in this Act, the committee 
includes a provision that would authorize appropriations to 
provide sustainment and assistance to the military and national 
security forces of Ukraine.
    The committee believes that all of these U.S. efforts taken 
in combination are vital to address regional security and to 
deter and counter continued Russian aggression. The committee 
further believes that these efforts should be enduring and must 
be sustained as core activities of the Department of Defense in 
Europe.

         National Guard and Reserve Component Equipment Account

    The budget request for Overseas Contingency Operations 
contained no funding for National Guard and Reserve Component 
equipment account. Elsewhere in this Act, the committee notes 
that the base budget request contained $3.1 billion for 
procurement of National Guard and Reserve Component equipment.
    Given the uncertainty of the current and projected fiscal 
environment, the availability of equipment needed to sustain 
and modernize the National Guard and Reserve Components as an 
operational reserve and for their domestic support missions 
remains a concern. The committee recognizes the National Guard 
and Reserve Components continue to report significant equipment 
shortages in modernized equipment. For example, the committee 
notes there are significant modernization and capability 
challenges associated with the current Air National Guard 
aircraft charged with the Aerospace Control Alert mission.
    The committee believes additional funds would help 
eliminate identified shortfalls in the areas of critical dual-
use equipment. The committee expects these funds to be used for 
the purposes of, but not limited to, the procurement of 
aircraft, avionic and radar upgrades for legacy strike fighter 
aircraft, wheeled and tracked combat vehicles, tactical wheeled 
vehicles, ammunition, small arms, tactical radios to include 
single channel ground and airborne radio systems, non-system 
training devices, logistics automation systems, sense and avoid 
system upgrades for unmanned aerial systems, civil support 
communication systems, semipermanent humidity controlled 
aircraft shelters, chemical/biological protective shelters, 
internal and external fuel tanks for rotorcraft, F-16 center 
display units, mobile ad hoc network emergency communications 
equipment, and other critical dual-use, unfunded procurement 
items for the National Guard and Reserve Components.
    The committee recommends additional funding for a National 
Guard and Reserve Component equipment account within the 
Overseas Contingency Operations budget request. The committee 
also recommends $3.1 billion, the full amount of the base 
budget request, for National Guard and Reserve equipment.

Support to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan to Counter the Islamic State 
                         of Iraq and the Levant

    Elsewhere in this Act, the committee would increase support 
to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan for training, operations, 
and enhancement of their capability to fight the Islamic State 
of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).
    Specifically, this Act would provide: (1) $300.0 million 
for support to the border security of Jordan, (2) $16.5 million 
for support to the training and operations of the Jordanian 
military, and (3) $300.0 million for enhancements to the 
capabilities of the Jordanian military.
    The committee continues to believe that the United States 
should take all steps to ensure that it is supporting Jordan in 
its fight against ISIL to include providing parts, equipment, 
training, and enhanced capability in a timely manner.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations


                         Section 1501--Purpose

    This section would establish the purpose of this title and 
make authorization of appropriations available upon enactment 
of this Act for the Department of Defense, in addition to 
amounts otherwise authorized in this Act, to provide for 
additional costs due to overseas contingency operations and 
other additional funding requirements.

                       Section 1502--Procurement

    This section would authorize additional appropriations for 
procurement at the levels identified in section 4102 of 
division D of this Act.

       Section 1503--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation

    This section would authorize additional appropriations for 
research, development, test, and evaluation at the levels 
identified in section 4202 of division D of this Act.

                Section 1504--Operation and Maintenance

    This section would authorize additional appropriations for 
operation and maintenance programs at the levels identified in 
sections 4302 and 4303 of division D of this Act.
    The committee notes that funds authorized for the Syria 
Train & Equip Fund shall be executed pursuant to section 1209 
of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-
291).

                    Section 1505--Military Personnel

    This section would authorize additional appropriations for 
military personnel at the levels identified in section 4402 of 
division D of this Act.

                  Section 1506--Working Capital Funds

    This section would authorize additional appropriations for 
Defense Working Capital Funds at the levels identified in 
section 4502 of division D of this Act.

 Section 1507--Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-
                                  Wide

    This section would authorize additional appropriations for 
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-Wide at 
the level identified in section 4502 of division D of this Act.

                Section 1508--Defense Inspector General

    This section would authorize additional appropriations for 
the Office of the Inspector General at the levels identified in 
section 4502 of division D of this Act.

                  Section 1509--Defense Health Program

    This section would authorize additional appropriations for 
the Defense Health Program at the levels identified in section 
4502 of division D of this Act.

                     Subtitle B--Financial Matters


          Section 1521--Treatment as Additional Authorizations

    This section would state that amounts authorized to be 
appropriated by this title are in addition to amounts otherwise 
authorized to be appropriated by this Act.

                Section 1522--Special Transfer Authority

    This section would authorize the transfer of up to $3.5 
billion of additional war-related funding authorizations in 
this title among the accounts in this title.

    Subtitle C--European Reassurance Initiative and Related Matters


   Section 1531--Statement of Policy Regarding European Reassurance 
                               Initiative

    This section would express a series of findings 
highlighting continued aggression and intimidation by the 
Russian Federation against U.S. allies and partners in Europe, 
in particular, and include a statement of policy on efforts by 
the United States to continue and expand initiatives to 
reassure U.S. allies and partners and to deter aggression and 
intimidation by the Russian Government, in order to enhance 
security and stability in the region.

 Section 1532--Assistance and Sustainment to the Military and National 
                       Security Forces of Ukraine

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense, in 
concurrence with the Secretary of State, to provide assistance 
and sustainment to the military and national security forces of 
Ukraine through September 30, 2016. This assistance would 
include the explicit authority for the Secretary of Defense to 
provide lethal weapons of a defensive nature to the security 
forces of Ukraine.
    This section would also require a notification to specified 
congressional committees containing a description of the plan 
for providing assistance, and require a quarterly report on the 
status of the activities and assistance. Lastly, this section 
would authorize appropriations of $200.0 million to carry out 
this authority.
    While the committee acknowledges the Administration's 
efforts to provide nonlethal security assistance to Ukraine, 
including its March 2015 announcement that $75.0 million in 
Department of Defense European Reassurance Initiative funds 
would be allocated to provide additional nonlethal equipment to 
Ukraine, the committee believes that defensive weapons and 
training are also necessary to enhance the defense of Ukraine. 
The committee notes that a February 2015 Atlantic Council, 
Brookings Institute, and Chicago Council on Global Affairs 
Report, ``Preserving Ukraine's Independence, Resisting Russian 
Aggression: What the United States and NATO [the North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization] Must Do,'' authored by former senior U.S. 
diplomatic and military officials, came to a similar conclusion 
in its recommendation that the United States and NATO ``bolster 
Ukraine's defense and deter further Russian aggression by 
providing military assistance to Ukraine--including lethal 
defensive assistance.''
    The committee views this Ukraine assistance authority as 
part of a larger policy to reassure U.S. allies and partners in 
Europe and to deter further Russian aggression in both 
conventional and unconventional forms. Therefore, elsewhere in 
this Act, the committee includes a provision that would 
authorize funds for the Department of Defense to continue its 
European Reassurance Initiative activities, including 
increasing training, exercises, and partnership capacity with 
European allies and partners. Additionally, elsewhere in this 
report, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
undertake a study on how the Department should address 
unconventional warfare methods.

          Subtitle D--Limitations, Reports, and Other Matters


Section 1541--Continuation of Existing Limitation on Use of Afghanistan 
                          Security Forces Fund

    This section would continue the existing limitation on the 
use of funds in the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (ASFF) 
subject to conditions of section 1513 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181), as 
amended by section 1531 of the Ike Skelton National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-383), 
through fiscal year 2016.
    Additionally, this section would require that $50.0 million 
from ASFF be used for the recruitment and retention of women in 
the Afghanistan National Security Forces, including the 
modification of facilities of the Ministry of the Interior and 
the Ministry of Defense to accommodate female service members 
and police.
    Further, this section would require that, not later than 
120 days after the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 
Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, submit 
to the congressional defense committees, and the Committee on 
Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign 
Affairs of the House of Representatives, an inventory of the 
facilities and services of the Afghan Ministry of Defense and 
the Ministry of the Interior that are lacking in adequate 
resources for Afghan female service members and police.
    In addition, this section would require that, not later 
than 60 days after the submission of such an inventory, the 
Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary of 
State, submit to the congressional defense committees, and the 
Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee 
on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, a plan to 
address the shortcomings of such facilities and services that 
the Secretaries consider to be most significant and to identify 
the funding that would be required to fully address such 
shortcomings.
    This section also would require the Secretary of Defense, 
with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, to submit to 
the congressional defense committees, and the Committee on 
Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign 
Affairs of the House of Representatives, updates to the 
inventory and plan required at the same time that the President 
submits the budget under section 1105(a) of title 31, United 
States Code, for each fiscal year through fiscal year 2020.

      Section 1542--Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund

    This section would authorize various transfer authorities, 
reporting requirements, and other associated activities for the 
Joint Improvised Explosive Device (IED) Defeat Fund, as managed 
by the Joint IED Defeat Organization, or director of the 
successor defense agency to the Joint Improvised Explosive 
Device Defeat Organization, during fiscal year 2016. This 
section would also modify the implementation requirements 
associated with the plan for consolidation and alignment of 
rapid acquisition organizations required to be developed by 
section 1533(b) of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public 
Law 113-291). Finally, this section would repeal the 
prohibition in section 1533(d) of Public Law 113-291 on the use 
of fiscal year 2015 funds for the Joint IED Defeat Fund to 
assign personnel or contractors to combatant commands or 
associated military components under certain circumstances.

     TITLE XVI--STRATEGIC PROGRAMS, CYBER, AND INTELLIGENCE MATTERS

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                          Army Space Programs

    The committee is aware of various U.S. Army Space and 
Missile Defense Command (SMDC) investments in space 
technologies to support the warfighter. One program that SMDC 
is developing, called Kestrel Eye, will launch two low-cost 
imaging satellites, which are controlled by and provide direct 
support to tactical forces. Additionally, there are other 
investments in low-cost communications satellites for beyond-
line-of-sight mission command for tactical forces in forward-
deployed operating areas. These communications satellites may 
also offer the ability to provide greater situational awareness 
and rapid targeting information to tactical operations, as well 
as provide a testbed for telemetry collection and technology 
demonstration of a space-based range. Lastly, the Enhanced 
Advanced Space Data Exploitation capability is designed to 
provide consumable, real-time information and intelligence to 
the warfighter. Further space data exploitation and integration 
may offer significant cost savings and operational advantage to 
military forces.
    The committee fully supports these SMDC activities and 
encourages the Army to continue technology development for 
tactical forces to harness the unique advantages that space 
provides.
    The committee also encourages the National Geospatial-
Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency, which are 
both combat support agencies, as well as the National 
Reconnaissance Office, to partner with SMDC on opportunities to 
further leverage the advantages of space capabilities for 
tactical forces.

                      Calibration of Space Sensors

    The committee supports the calibration of space sensors 
prior to launch. Without proper calibration, characterization, 
testing, and evaluation, there is risk of under-performance for 
the warfighter, and waste of investment of the taxpayer. In 
this regard, the committee notes that short-term decisions 
based on budget-driven solutions could have longer-term 
implications. Therefore, the committee recommends that space 
sensors being developed by the Department of Defense be 
properly calibrated, tested, and evaluated prior to launch.

              Combatant Command Commercial Imagery Tasking

    The committee is aware that the flexibility for a combatant 
command to directly task a space-based reconnaissance asset 
enhances the warfighter's ability to address intelligence and/
or operational gaps. In this regard, the Operationally 
Responsive Space satellite (ORS-1) provided direct tasking 
ability for the commanders of the combatant commands, most 
directly to U.S. Central Command. However, the ORS-1 satellite 
is currently operating well beyond its design life, and there 
is no related follow-on program planned. The committee believes 
that allowing the combatant commands to directly task 
commercial imagery assets could be the logical next step in 
providing that flexibility and improving responsiveness to the 
warfighter.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff, based on the feedback from each of the 
combatant commanders, to provide a briefing to the House 
Committee on Armed Services and the House Permanent Select 
Committee on Intelligence by November 1, 2015, on the utility 
and impacts of combatant commanders directly tasking commercial 
imagery satellites. Based on feedback from the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff, the committee further directs the 
Director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), 
in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Intelligence and the Director of National Intelligence, to 
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services and 
the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence by January 
1, 2016, on current and potential future activities, including 
costs, to address the ability of the combatant commands to 
directly task commercial imagery satellites. The Director of 
NGA should consider current and future complementary commercial 
imagery capabilities to support this activity.

            Commercial Space-based Environmental Monitoring

    The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has 
various requirements for accurate and relevant characterization 
of the atmospheric, maritime, terrestrial, and space 
environments to support the full spectrum of military 
operations worldwide. The committee is also aware that multiple 
U.S. companies are planning to develop and commercially sell 
space-based environmental monitoring capabilities. The 
committee is interested in the utility of these potential 
future commercial capabilities for Department of Defense 
requirements.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in 
coordination with the Secretary of the Air Force, to provide a 
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by December 
1, 2015, on the current and projected commercial space-based 
environmental monitoring capabilities, the utility of these 
capabilities to meet Department of Defense requirements, the 
cost and benefit analysis of opportunities in the future to 
leverage these potential commercial capabilities, and any other 
considerations the Under Secretary deems appropriate.

              Comptroller General Review of Patriot System

    The committee is aware of the increasing operational 
demands being made on the Patriot system to meet current and 
emerging threats, as well as the Army's rising investments to 
modernize the Patriot system, and the impact that modernization 
has on coordinating systems in the Army's Air and Missile 
Defense portfolio.
    In the President's request, excluding costs for the 
development and acquisition of a new radar, the Army plans to 
invest a combined total of nearly $2.00 billion in 
modernization of the Patriot system over the next 5 years in 
research, development, test, and evaluation and missile 
procurement. Given the significant planned investment of 
funding and the large number of concurrent modernization 
activities, the committee is interested in increasing oversight 
of the Patriot system and its modernization, including testing 
and fielding, particularly in the next 5 years, both within the 
Patriot modernization program elements and other Army Air and 
Missile Defense coordinating programs.
    In addition, the committee is aware that Patriot 
modernization efforts not only affect Army coordinating 
systems, but have greater implications since many of these 
modernization efforts are for increased interoperability with 
elements in the Missile Defense Agency's Ballistic Missile 
Defense System.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to provide an interim report to the congressional 
defense committees not later than March 1, 2016, and a final 
report not later than June 1, 2016, that includes an assessment 
of the following: (1) the current status of the Army's Patriot 
System performance, including how well the system's current 
performance is meeting combatant commander requirements, and 
any gaps that may exist between how the system currently 
functions and functionality the combatant commanders need in 
order to meet the growing and changing threat; (2) the Army's 
strategy, including its cost, schedule, and testing plans to 
upgrade and modernize its Patriot system as well as other 
coordinating systems in the Army's Air and Missile Defense in 
order to meet combatant commander requirements and address the 
growing threat; (3) the effect that Patriot modernization 
requirements for integration and interoperability has on 
Ballistic Missile Defense Systems and coordinating allied 
systems for regional defense; (4) how well the Army has and is 
currently providing the training, size, capability, and 
availability of Patriot operators necessary to meet combatant 
commander needs and to remain current with the latest 
modernizations being added to the Patriot system; and (5) any 
other findings and recommendations on other acquisition issues 
with Patriot or its interfaces with other coordinating systems 
that the Comptroller General considers appropriate.
    The committee expects the Comptroller General to take into 
consideration the findings and analysis of the Department of 
Defense Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation office as it 
completes its ongoing Analysis of Opportunities on Patriot 
modernization, as well as other appropriate reviews and studies 
underway in the Joint Staff and Office of the Under Secretary 
of Defense for Policy.

 Continuing Oversight of Missile Defense Discussions with the Russian 
                               Federation

    The committee continues to have an interest in maintaining 
and protecting U.S. missile defense capability. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination 
with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to notify the 
House Committee on Armed Services not later than 1 week after 
the date on which the Department of Defense conducts any 
discussions with the Russian Federation pertaining to missile 
defense during fiscal year 2016. The committee notes that 
similar direction was provided to the Secretary for fiscal year 
2015 in the committee report (H. Rept. 113-446) accompanying 
the Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2015.

                   Cyber Defense Network Segmentation

    The committee is aware that the Department of Defense is 
looking at modifying the way it builds, maintains, and upgrades 
data center, including increased use of commercial cloud 
capabilities and public-private partnerships. The committee is 
aware that as the Department increasingly looks at software-
defined networking, it could potentially reduce the mobility of 
cyber threats across data center and other networks by 
increasing the compartmentalization and segmentation between 
systems, and providing a mix of security techniques to enable 
access to those compartments. Such actions have the potential 
to lessen the chance of a widespread or catastrophic breach, 
including breaches caused by insider threats. The committee 
encourages the Department to explore ways to use 
compartmentalization or segmentation as part of a software-
defined networking approach in order to increase the security 
of its networks.

                   Cyber Support to Civil Authorities

    The committee recognizes that the danger of disruptive and 
destructive cyber attacks is growing and that the U.S. military 
and civilian cyber infrastructure is being targeted by 
malicious government, criminal, and individual actors who try 
to avoid attribution. Although the Department of Defense 
generally does not resource support to civil authorities in 
response to a domestic cyber incident, the Department possesses 
an array of capabilities that may be requested when civilian 
response capabilities are overwhelmed or exhausted, or in 
instances where the Department offers unique capabilities not 
likely to be found elsewhere. For instance, the nexus with the 
authorities and responsibilities of the National Guard provides 
a valuable link between military capabilities and civilian 
State, local, tribal and Federal needs.
    In 2012, the Government Accountability Office highlighted 
gaps in the Department of Defense's plans and guidance for 
assisting civil authorities in the event of a domestic cyber 
incident. The committee notes that the Department of Defense 
has worked in coordination with the Department of Homeland 
Security and the Department of Justice to agree upon shared 
roles and responsibilities for Federal cyber security. The 
committee also notes that among the challenges the Department 
of Defense continues to face are determining the scope of the 
potential cyber support it may be requested to provide, and the 
appropriate mixture and involvement of Active and Reserve 
Component military cyber forces to meet anticipated defense 
cyber civil support needs. In testimony before the Subcommittee 
on Emerging Threats and Capabilities on March 4, 2015, the 
Commanding General of U.S. Army Cyber Command stated that 
``While title 10 authorities are clear, title 32 and State 
active duty require the application of varied State 
constitutional, legislative, and executive authorities and 
coordination with state Agencies and officials. While every 
State is different, there is merit in developing a common 
approach for authorities and capabilities to facilitate rapid 
and effective response in cyberspace.''
    Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to assess the Department of Defense's plans 
and actions for providing support to civil authorities in the 
event of a domestic cyber incident, and to provide a report on 
the findings to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate 
and the House of Representatives. The Comptroller General 
should provide a briefing on preliminary results to the House 
Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 2016, with the report 
to follow on a date agreed to at the time of briefing. The 
assessment should address the following:
    (1) To what extent has the Department of Defense planned 
and identified its critical capabilities for responding to 
domestic cyber civil support incidents, including the use of 
Active and Reserve Component cyber capabilities and personnel 
for civil support?
    (2) To what extent has the Department of Defense trained 
and exercised for domestic cyber civil support incidents and 
coordinated with the Department of Homeland Security and other 
relevant Federal agencies?
    (3) To what extent has the Department of Defense or the 
Department of Homeland security developed a common approach for 
title 32 and State Active Duty forces that balances the 
differences in State approaches, authorities, and 
responsibilities?

               Department of Defense Cyber Mission Forces

    The committee recognizes the growing importance of the 
Cyber Mission Forces within the Department of Defense to 
address current and future cyber security requirements. The 
committee is aware that the evolving nature of cyber threats 
and missions will require the Department to reassess their 
force structure and operations on a continuous basis. Section 
1631 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-
291) requires the Secretary of Defense to provide to Congress 
an annual budget justification display that includes (1) a 
major force program category for the Future Years Defense 
Program of the Department of Defense for the training, manning, 
and equipping of the cyber mission forces; and (2) program 
elements for the cyber mission forces, beginning with the 
fiscal year 2017 budget request.
    The committee believes that these annual budget 
justification displays will provide the transparency necessary 
to address challenges with efficiently using resources towards 
the evolving cyber threats and missions and maintain 
congressional oversight of cyber investments.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees 
by September 1, 2015, on progress towards meeting the 
requirements of Section 1631 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. 
``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291).

  Deployment of a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense Battery in the 
                           Republic of Korea

    The committee is aware that bilateral discussions have 
taken place regarding the potential deployment of a U.S. 
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) battery to the 
Republic of Korea. The committee sees mutual benefit in the 
deployment of such a capability that protects both Koreans and 
deployed U.S. forces from the nuclear and ballistic missile 
threat posed by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
    As noted by the Commander of U.S. Forces Korea in testimony 
before the committee in March 2015, ``[I]t is critical for the 
alliance to build a layered and interoperable BMD capability.'' 
The commander has further stated that, ``[t]he THAAD system 
provides a greater sensor array, better awareness of the 
threats and adds to the interoperability of all our systems.'' 
The committee shares this assessment of THAAD and believes it 
would both enhance and complement the current air and missile 
defense capabilities maintained by both countries, including 
across the entire ballistic missile kill chain, on the 
peninsula.
    The committee recognizes that any deployment decision 
regarding THAAD rests with the Government of the Republic of 
Korea. Should such a decision be made, the committee would 
welcome it as a further demonstration of the collective 
security commitments of both countries.

Development of Missile Defense Targets Related to the Hypersonic Threat

    The committee is aware of the rapidly evolving threat from 
potential adversaries' development of hypersonic weapons; 
consequently, the committee discusses potential responses to 
these developments elsewhere in this report.
    The committee is also aware of several recent tests by the 
People's Republic of China of hypersonic weapons, as well as 
other hypersonic weapon developments by the Russian Federation 
and the Republic of India. The committee believes this rapidly 
emerging capability could be a threat to national security and 
our operational forces.
    The committee recognizes U.S. Army Space and Missile 
Defense Command's Advanced Hypersonic Weapons (AHW) 
developments have resulted in significant work in design, 
technology development, hardware engineering, and understanding 
relevant to hypersonic threats. The committee is aware that 
Flight 1A of the AHW program successfully demonstrated a medium 
range flight of a hypersonic boost-glide system. AHW Flight 2 
was intended to mature these technologies and demonstrate a 
longer range capability, but it failed shortly after ignition 
for reasons related to launch configuration control.
    The committee believes that the residual hardware, designs, 
and technology from these earlier developments should be used 
to develop and provide a hypersonic threat target system to 
improve U.S. defenses, based on successfully flight-tested 
designs, to characterize emerging foreign threat developments, 
and understand potential threat capabilities.
    The committee is concerned that without proper 
understanding of and testing against realistic threats, the 
United States will not be prepared for the emerging 
capabilities of our adversaries. The committee believes that 
increasing our understanding and testing is important given 
significant investments and capability developments by the 
United States and an emerging threat.

           Distributed Common Ground System--Army GAO Report

    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the 
General Accountability Office (GAO) to provide a report to the 
House Committee on Armed Services by February 1, 2016, that 
reviews the schedule and cost estimates for all increments of 
the Distributed Common Ground System--Army (DCGS-A). This 
review should examine the program to determine the extent to 
which:
    (1) The current schedule was prepared in accordance with 
standard government best practices for program management;
    (2) The current cost estimates are consistent with GAO's 
cost estimation guidelines;
    (3) The program has changed or modified their planned cost 
and schedule estimates over the course of the program; and
    (4) The extent to which the program has met cost goals and 
performance targets.

 Evaluation of Missile Defense Options to Confront Hypersonic Missile 
                                Systems

    The committee is aware that the worldwide ballistic missile 
threat is growing in sophistication, capability, and numbers. 
The committee also notes the Future Years Defense Program for 
the Missile Defense Agency submitted along with the budget 
request for fiscal year 2016 included $291.0 million for the 
development of an extended range (ER) variant of the Terminal 
High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD). The committee supports an 
investment in such a capability, understanding that although a 
material solution decision has not yet been made, THAAD-ER 
could be a vital capability improvement for the Ballistic 
Missile Defense System to defeat evolving and emerging threats, 
including hypersonic vehicles and anti-ship ballistic missiles.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff, in coordination with the Commander, U.S. 
Central Command, the Commander, U.S. Pacific Command, and the 
Commander, U.S. European Command, to provide a briefing to the 
House Committee on Armed Services not later than February 1, 
2016, concerning the potential utility of THAAD-ER or similar 
capability to counter emerging and evolving threats in each of 
their respective geographic area of responsibility.
    The committee further directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Policy to provide a briefing to the House Committee 
on Armed Services not later than February 1, 2016, on potential 
opportunities for co-development or co-financing of THAAD-ER or 
a similar capability with an allied nation, and any policies, 
technology release decisions, data sharing, or other related 
issues that would need to be resolved prior to entering into 
such an arrangement.
    Lastly, the committee directs the Director, Missile Defense 
Agency to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed 
Services not later than December 1, 2015, on the results of the 
THAAD-ER concept development, and the Director's analysis of 
regional sensors and interceptors against emerging threats, 
including on the value and cost of developing such capability.

   Evaluation of National Security Space and Missile Test Ranges and 
                             Infrastructure

    The committee is aware that several Department of Defense 
offices and agencies, including the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Air 
Force, the U.S. Army, and the Missile Defense Agency, conduct 
multiple test launches each year to collect data on system 
performance and reliability. The committee is also aware that 
while some of these tests have different standards for data 
fidelity collection and timeliness, they share the basic goal 
of collecting large amounts of telemetric and other data, and 
almost all of these users have similar range safety 
requirements. The committee understands that, combined, these 
Department of Defense users spend multiple billions of dollars 
per year on test activities, including hundreds-of-millions of 
dollars on test ranges and infrastructure. The committee 
believes the Department should conduct an intensive review to 
understand these costs and how it could realize savings across 
the defense test enterprise. For example, the committee 
understands that the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense 
Command (SMDC)/Army Forces Strategic Command has conducted 
limited experimentation on potentially promising technologies 
to yield savings.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Director of Cost 
Assessment and Program Evaluation to collect data from all 
entities and offices involved in relevant test activities and 
to conduct a Business Case Analysis (BCA) on specific options, 
including the SMDC Space Based Range, for how to accomplish the 
goals of these Department of Defense users' test activities 
while achieving meaningful savings. The committee intends that 
the BCA focus on national security space and missile defense 
users, including the U.S. Air Force Intercontinental Ballistic 
Missile test program, the U.S. Navy Strategic Systems Program 
test launches, Missile Defense Agency test efforts, and other 
similar test activities within the Department of Defense.
    The committee further directs the Director of Cost 
Assessment and Program Evaluation to provide the data and 
conclusions from this review to the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics not later than 
December 1, 2015. Finally, the committee directs the Under 
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics 
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services 
not later than February 15, 2016, consisting of the findings 
and recommendations of the BCA and the Under Secretary's views 
on the analysis, and recommendations for a roadmap for the 
Department to implement a way ahead on its test enterprise 
based on the BCA.

   Funding for Pilot Program for Acquisition of Commercial Satellite 
                         Communication Services

    The budget request contained $53.5 million in PE 33600F, 
but contained no funding for the pilot program for acquisition 
of commercial satellite communication services, also known as 
pathfinder programs, as authorized in section 1605 of the Carl 
Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291). 
Therefore, the committee recommends $79.5 million, an increase 
of $26.0 million, in PE 33600F for the pilot program for 
acquisition of commercial satellite communication services.

Funding Mechanism for Department of Defense Priorities at the National 
                    Nuclear Security Administration

    The committee is aware that, from fiscal year 2011 to 
fiscal year 2015, the Department of Defense has transferred 
billions of dollars in defense budget authority to the National 
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) during formulation of 
the President's annual budget request to support priorities set 
by the Nuclear Weapons Council. The committee notes the 
cooperation between NNSA and the Department of Defense, through 
the Nuclear Weapons Council, is to ensure the military's 
requirements related to nuclear weapons sustainment and 
modernization, including nuclear weapons life extension 
programs and plans for building a responsive infrastructure and 
capability, are met. The committee is also aware of the 
challenges related to management, accountability, and 
transparency resulting from this budget authority transfer.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to provide a 
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by December 
1, 2015, containing the Under Secretary's assessment of costs, 
benefits, and risks of various options for either continuing, 
discontinuing, or modifying the current budget authority 
transfer mechanism, including assessing the benefit and risk of 
using a Work-For-Others funding mechanism. Such assessment 
should discuss what additional authorities may be needed to 
carry out each option.

                       Global Positioning System

    The committee notes that the Global Positioning System 
(GPS) is a critical national asset that provides a worldwide 
navigation and timing source which supports military, civil, 
and commercial users. There are multiple segments of the Air 
Force GPS program, including space, user terminals, and the 
ground system. The committee supports the GPS program.
    The committee recognizes the challenges during the initial 
development of GPS III space vehicles. The committee is also 
aware that some of the major technical hurdles associated with 
the initial technology development may have been overcome. The 
committee supports the GPS III program, and recommends the Air 
Force fully leverage the non-recurring investment in program 
planning for the future space vehicles. The committee continues 
to support evolutionary acquisition with technology insertion 
plans to meet warfighter requirements.
    The committee continues to recommend that the Department 
take the necessary steps to accelerate the development and 
fielding of M-code capable user terminals. M-code capable 
receivers, when paired with the necessary space and ground 
capabilities, will provide significantly greater anti-jam 
capabilities for the warfighter. The committee addresses this 
matter elsewhere in this Act.
    Regarding the ground segment, the committee is also aware 
of the challenges with the Next Generation Operational Control 
Segment (OCX). OCX is designed to deliver incremental 
capabilities in multiple blocks. The program has rigorous 
information assurance requirements to ensure the system is 
secure from adversary threats. The committee believes that an 
independent advisory team, compromised of experts from other 
Department of Defense agencies and federally funded research 
and development centers, may provide valuable support to ensure 
the Government meets its objectives on this critical program. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to provide a 
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by October 1, 
2015, on the potential value and feasibility of establishing a 
temporary independent advisory team for GPS OCX.

                    Ground Based Strategic Deterrent

    The committee commends the Air Force for its proposal to 
structure the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) program, 
which will create a follow-on to the Minuteman III 
intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), as an integrated 
system consisting of the missiles, launch facilities, launch 
control centers, communications, and related infrastructure and 
equipment. The committee believes the Air Force's structural 
approach to creating a GBSD ``weapon system'' will ease both 
acquisition and long-term sustainment of all the core 
components that comprise the ICBM capability.
    As the Air Force continues the materiel solution analysis 
phase for the GBSD program, the committee believes that the Air 
Force should carefully consider the program's effects on the 
solid rocket motor industrial base. Due to the volume of rocket 
motors likely to be procured, the Air Force's acquisition 
strategy for GBSD will have lasting impacts on the health and 
vitality of this key element of the U.S. defense industrial 
base. As with all major defense acquisition programs, the 
committee believes competition generally provides the Air Force 
with the best combination of innovation, cost reduction, and 
performance. The committee encourages the Secretary of the Air 
Force to develop an affordable acquisition strategy for GBSD 
that considers the value of competition to maximize benefit to 
the Government and maintains a strong solid rocket motor 
industrial base. To better understand the GBSD strategy, the 
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide a 
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by September 
30, 2015, that provides an assessment of GBSD's potential 
impacts on the solid rocket motor industrial base, what 
acquisition strategy options are available to the Secretary, 
and an evaluation of the costs and benefits of options that may 
provide the Secretary the ability to leverage competition 
throughout the life cycle of the GBSD program.

                    Imagery Analysis and Acquisition

    The committee commends the Director, National Geospatial-
Intelligence Agency (NGA) for his leadership in assessing the 
merit of using potentially new approaches to intelligence 
collection and analysis that could inform, complement, and add 
to NGA's support of warfighter requirements. While recognizing 
the need to take the appropriate steps to protect national 
security, the committee notes the benefit of the expanding 
commercial imagery capabilities which could support defense 
requirements. The committee remains interested in the 
commercial capability developments, as well as the steps to 
protect national security, and encourages the Director and the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Policy to keep the committee 
informed on these issues as they relate to the Department of 
Defense.

  Improving Contract Cost Data Collection and Analysis at the Missile 
   Defense Agency through Evaluation of Terminal High Altitude Area 
                     Defense Multiyear Procurement

    The committee is aware that the Missile Defense Agency 
(MDA) briefly evaluated multiyear procurement of Terminal High 
Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) interceptors in the process of 
developing the fiscal year 2016 budget request. Multiyear 
procurement of THAAD interceptors could have helped to arrest a 
significant decline in such interceptor production across the 
past several fiscal years by reducing per unit interceptor 
cost. However, such evaluation was hindered by the lack of high 
fidelity and detailed cost information of the parts and 
components of THAAD interceptors.
    The committee believes that effective cost analysis depends 
on the availability and quality of historical program cost 
data. The committee is aware that the Director of Cost 
Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) currently manages the 
Department of Defense's primary weapon system cost data 
collection system. The components of the system include 
defining cost data requirements, development of cost collection 
plans to meet these requirements, insuring these plans are 
included in acquisition contracts, performing quality control 
on the contractor data submissions, archiving and organizing 
the cost data to facilitate analysis, and protecting access to 
the data.
    The committee believes CAPE could assist MDA in developing 
practices and policies, including contract requirements, to 
improve contract cost data collection at MDA. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Director of Cost Assessment and Program 
Evaluation, in coordination with the Director of the Missile 
Defense Agency, to evaluate the potential per unit cost savings 
of THAAD interceptors if acquired through multiyear procurement 
as compared to recent MDA procurement contracts. In conducting 
the evaluation, the Director of Cost Assessment and Program 
Evaluation should also assess and make recommendations for (1) 
reducing the barriers to collect adequate contract cost data 
for THAAD interceptors specifically; and (2) what contract cost 
data collection policies, practices, and requirements MDA 
should adopt to achieve identified Department of Defense best 
practices more broadly. The committee further directs the 
Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation to brief the 
results of the evaluation to the House Committee on Armed 
Services not later than February 15, 2016.
    In addition, the committee directs the Director of the 
Missile Defense Agency to provide a briefing to the House 
Committee on Armed Services not later than March 31, 2016, on 
its plan to implement the assessment and recommendations for 
cost data collection improvements made by the Director of Cost 
Assessment and Program Evaluation.

              Integrated Air and Missile Defense Strategy

    The committee has reviewed the ``Joint Integrated Air and 
Missile Defense: Vision 2020'' strategy approved by the 
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on January 27, 2014. The 
committee commends the Chairman for the thoughtful and forward-
leaning approach he has brought to a critical challenge this 
nation will face in the near future when it comes to air and 
missile defense.
    The committee is interested in understanding how the 
``Vision 2020'' is being implemented by the Joint Staff and the 
relevant combatant commanders. Therefore, the committee directs 
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to provide a briefing 
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than 
September 3, 2015, on the following:
    (1) How the Global Employment for the Force has been or is 
being updated to reflect the six ``Imperatives'' stated by the 
Chairman in the ``Vision 2020'' strategy;
    (2) Specific initiatives undertaken by the Commander, U.S. 
European Command, the Commander, U.S. Central Command, and the 
Commander, U.S. Pacific Command to implement ``Vision 2020'' or 
to otherwise ensure the true and complete integration of air 
and missile defense, including prioritization of operational 
and planning resources, and exercises; and
    (3) The terms of reference, assumptions, analysis, and 
results of the Joint Capabilities Mix Study, IV.

   Interagency Collaboration on Physical Security for Nuclear Weapons

    As a key element of the ``3+2'' strategy for the future of 
the nuclear weapons stockpile, the Nuclear Weapons Council has 
identified collaboration and interoperability between the Navy 
and the Air Force as an integral measure for fulfilling the 
nuclear deterrence mission while minimizing costs. While at 
this early stage the success of the 3+2 in achieving this goal 
is uncertain, the committee is interested in exploring this 
principle within other areas of the council's jurisdiction.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Chairman of the 
Nuclear Weapons Council, in coordination with the Administrator 
for Nuclear Security, the Secretary of the Navy, and the 
Secretary of the Air Force, to provide a briefing to the House 
Committee on Armed Services by December 1, 2015, on 
opportunities, challenges, and plans for enhanced collaboration 
and interoperability of technologies between the military 
departments, the Department of Defense, and the National 
Nuclear Security Administration on physical security for 
nuclear weapons. The briefing should describe opportunities for 
collaboration on: physical security efforts in general; joint 
development or use of analysis tools, methodologies, and 
technologies; integration and prioritization of technology 
needs; and development of common standards and processes for 
each organization to utilize physical security technology 
approved for general use in nuclear weapon security 
environments.

                   Joint Integrated Lifecycle Surety

    The committee believes the Joint Integrated Lifecycle 
Surety (JILS) analysis tool developed through cooperation of 
the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and the 
Department of Defense may provide operators, analysts, and 
senior leaders unique insights into the safety and security of 
U.S. nuclear weapons across the full spectrum of scenarios that 
they may encounter throughout their life cycle. The committee 
believes this tool could be utilized to inform future 
investments intended to reduce nuclear weapon safety and 
security risks across the entire Department of Defense and NNSA 
nuclear enterprise and each warhead's life cycle, from cradle 
to grave and from stockpile to target.
    The committee directs the Chairman of the Nuclear Weapons 
Council to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed 
Services on JILS by November 1, 2015. The briefing should 
include the methodology and current results of the JILS tool; 
the scenarios examined by the tool; any impacts the tool has 
had on previous decision-making; any plans for enhancing the 
tool in the future; and a description of how the Nuclear 
Weapons Council, the military services, and NNSA will leverage 
JILS to study cost-benefit and risk in future life extension 
programs, delivery system acquisition programs, and other 
efforts to enhance safety, security, or use control for U.S. 
nuclear weapons.

              Joint Space Operations Center Mission System

    The committee continues to support the Air Force 
development of the Joint Space Operations Center Mission System 
(JMS) program. JMS is a critical program designed to deliver an 
integrated, net-centric space situational awareness and command 
and control capability. Given the growing space threat 
environment, the committee encourages the Air Force to look for 
reasonable opportunities to accelerate the delivery of key 
capabilities, or increments, of the program. The committee also 
recognizes and supports the Air Force's efforts to leverage 
mature commercial software for JMS, in an effort to reduce 
costs, increase capability, and shorten schedule timelines. The 
committee expects the Air Force to perform thorough market 
research and evaluation of mature commercial capabilities for 
the follow-on increment of the JMS program.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed 
Services by December 1, 2015, on the status and potential to 
reasonably accelerate the current increment of the JMS program 
and the plan for future increments, including the status of 
market research to leverage commercially available 
capabilities.

                      Mission System Cybersecurity

    The committee is aware that the weapon and mission systems 
upon which warfighters rely are increasingly being networked 
together for greater effectiveness and interoperability. 
However, this has happened without a sufficient appreciation of 
the cybersecurity threat environments currently facing such 
systems. As noted in the final report of the Defense Science 
Board Task Force on Resilient Military Systems and the Advanced 
Cyber Threat from January 2013, the Department should be doing 
more to build a cyber-resilient force that should extend beyond 
traditional networks and information systems to include these 
weapon and mission systems. Included in this would be the 
introduction and incorporation of cyber resiliency requirements 
throughout the Department, for both new and emerging systems, 
and developing the means to red-team, test, model and provide 
feedback to the acquisition community and Intelligence 
Community.
    Despite Department of Defense policies designed to address 
this threat, such as Department of Defense Instruction 5200.44, 
and the formation of task forces for the Navy and the Air 
Force, the committee is concerned that progress on the 
identification and remediation of cyber vulnerabilities on 
vital legacy platforms may be lagging. Moreover, the committee 
is concerned that without the direction and funding to 
immediately address these vulnerabilities, program leaders will 
continue to focus limited resources on other platform needs.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in 
coordination with the military service chiefs, to provide a 
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by February 
1, 2016, detailing the process for identifying and assessing 
vulnerabilities on legacy weapons and mission systems, as well 
as for designating funding to remedy these vulnerabilities. The 
briefing shall also include an accounting of the legacy weapon 
and mission systems that the military service chiefs have 
directed to be assessed through this process, the budget and 
acquisition processes designed to support assessment and 
remediation efforts, and a schedule and proposed budget for 
conducting the required assessments and completing any 
necessary remediation.

                      Mobile User Objective System

    The committee supports the U.S. Navy Mobile User Objective 
System (MUOS) program to provide next-generation narrow-band 
tactical satellite communications to U.S. forces. The committee 
is aware of the progress being made on the program, and 
continues to support efforts that accelerate the schedule to 
provide the full MUOS capability to the warfighter.

       Modeling and Simulation for Nuclear Targeting and Planning

    The committee is aware of efforts to improve both tactical 
and strategic targeting and planning processes to better 
incorporate modeling and simulation of nuclear strikes' 
potential effects and consequences across a range of factors 
including political, military, economic, social, 
infrastructure, and information. The committee believes such 
efforts could provide planners and senior decision-makers 
important information when considering strike options, 
particularly with regards to nuclear weapons employment. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in 
coordination with the Commander, U.S. Strategic Command and the 
Director of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, to provide a 
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by October 
31, 2015, on the Department's efforts to integrate modeling and 
simulation of a broad spectrum of a nuclear strike's potential 
effects and consequences into nuclear targeting analysis and 
planning.

             Multi-source Cyber Intelligence Analysis Needs

    The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense is 
making significant strides in building out a cyber mission 
force to operate and defend critical Department information 
systems, and is on track to have full operational capability by 
2017. However, the committee is concerned that those teams, 
while they have needed organic intelligence analysis 
capability, may not be adequate to meet the full multi-source 
cyber intelligence collection and analysis needs required to 
support and enable those cyber mission forces. As recommended 
in the final report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on 
the Resilient Military Systems and the Advanced Cyber Threat 
from January 2013, the Department should be working with the 
Intelligence Community to increase the priority of support for 
collection and analysis of high-end cyber threats, including 
the identification and understanding of adversarial cyber 
weapon development organizations, tools, leadership, and 
intentions, and the development of targeting information to 
support initiatives to counter cyber weaponization. While the 
National Security Agency provides significant support to those 
units, the need to provide multi-source intelligence support 
from the Defense Intelligence Agency and the service 
intelligence centers remains. It is unclear to the committee 
whether resourcing decisions related to personnel to support 
cyber has extended to the multi-source intelligence support 
centers within the Department.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, 
in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 
to assess and validate the multi-source cyber intelligence 
collection and analysis needs of the Department of Defense, and 
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services 
and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence by 
November 1, 2015, on the findings of the analysis. The 
assessment should cover both the number of personnel needed, as 
well as the types and priority for current missions and 
tasking.

      Multiyear Procurement of Commercial Satellite Communications

    The committee believes that the current statutory language, 
specifically section 2306c of title 10, United States Code, 
provides the necessary authority to the Department of Defense 
to enter into contracts for periods of not more than 5 years 
for commercial satellite communications (SATCOM) services which 
support the broadly covered services identified in section 
2306c. When done appropriately, the committee supports 
multiyear leasing of commercial SATCOM as a way to lower costs 
for the Department, provide greater assurance to meet stable 
warfighter requirements, and partner with industry providers.
    The committee recognizes that multiyear leasing is not the 
solution for all of the Department's commercial satellite 
communications requirements, but is one useful acquisition 
approach that Department officials should use. Analysis 
provided by the Department and industry has shown the potential 
for significant savings in longer term contracts. Specifically, 
one group of industry providers publicly stated that ``studies 
have shown that buying capacity on the spot-market with IDIQ 
[indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity] contracts costs the 
DOD [Department of Defense] up to 25 percent more than it would 
pay with a long-term contract for the same capacity.''
    The committee looks forward to working with the Department 
on this important area to meet the requirements of the 
warfighter while reducing the costs to the taxpayers.

        National Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Resilience

    The committee recognizes that the Global Positioning System 
(GPS) is a critical national security capability, as well as a 
key element of critical infrastructure, and other civilian and 
commercial applications. The use and dependence on GPS signals 
in the United States continues to grow, despite the reality 
that GPS jammers are relatively inexpensive and widely 
available.
    Regarding a backup system to GPS, the committee is aware of 
a related National Security Presidential Directive which 
assigns the Secretary of Transportation, in coordination with 
the Secretary of Homeland Security, the responsibility to 
develop, acquire, operate, and maintain backup position, 
navigation, and timing capabilities that can support critical 
transportation, homeland security, and other critical civil and 
commercial infrastructure applications within the United 
States. This system could be of some benefit to the Department 
of Defense, but would not address all Department of Defense and 
warfighter requirements, as this system would be focused 
geographically within the United States.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a 
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by January 
15, 2016, on the Department of Defense requirements for backup 
position, navigation, and timing capabilities, including the 
plan and estimated cost to address such requirements. The 
committee expects the briefing to also include an assessment of 
the potential benefit of a U.S.-based ground system and any 
current or planned funding for this activity.

                  National Security Space Acquisition

    The committee is aware that acquiring and developing space 
programs, including satellites, ground segments, and user 
segments is a challenging task. The committee believes in the 
importance of well-developed acquisition strategies that are 
designed to manage risks, reduce costs, support the industrial 
base, and provide for technology insertion planning to meet 
warfighter and national security requirements.
    As an example of the current challenges, the General 
Accountability Office (GAO) recently reported on the Space-
based Infrared Systems Program and stated that ``current 
efforts--such as individual science and technology projects, 
including those in the Space Modernization Initiative--are 
limited by lack of direction, focusing on isolated 
technologies, and therefore are not set up to identify specific 
insertion points for a desired future system.'' The committee 
is concerned with the GAO's finding.
    The committee is aware of different acquisition planning, 
strategies, and approaches being taken throughout national 
security space programs. While there is not one answer for 
every program, there are best practices and lessons learned 
that could be applied across the national security space 
enterprise.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Director, Cost 
Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE), in coordination with 
the Assistant Director of National Intelligence for Systems and 
Resource Analyses (SRA) regarding intelligence programs, to 
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services and 
the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence by 
February 1, 2016, on a review of the acquisition practices for 
national security space programs of the Department of Defense, 
including with respect to the National Reconnaissance Office. 
The review should include the following:
    (1) An analysis of the costs, schedules, and performances 
of selected, recent, and relevant major current and previous 
contracts entered into for the acquisition of national security 
space programs;
    (2) An analysis of acquisition practices to determine 
differences in practices and which practices have proven 
effective in meeting requirements and appropriately managing 
cost and schedule;
    (3) An analysis of the technology insertion planning, 
achievements, and challenges for various programs and agencies;
    (4) Any recommendations to improve the acquisition and/or 
cost estimation practices for national security space programs 
by the Department of Defense; and
    (5) Any other related matters the Director, CAPE and the 
Assistant Director, SRA deem appropriate.

       Network Access Control Technologies for Secure Facilities

    The committee is aware that the Department of Defense 
continues to pursue enhancements to the security of its 
networks and systems to deal with new and evolving cyber 
security threats. Further, the committee recognizes that the 
Department's Secure Compartmented Information Facilities need 
to be both highly secure and highly connected from an 
information management perspective, which poses unique 
challenges in that kind of cyber threat environment. The 
prevalence of mobile devices increases the complexity of 
defending those facilities from the diverse array of cyber 
threats facing the Department. The committee encourages the 
Department to explore the use of network access control 
technologies to intelligently manage appropriate mobile device 
usage by cleared personnel, and to use such systems to 
determine the location of any unauthorized mobile devices 
within a secured facility.

      Nuclear Command, Control, and Communications Budget Displays

    The committee maintains an interest in ensuring the 
reliability and capability of a robust nuclear command, 
control, and communications (NC3) system. The committee is 
aware that, in response to an October 2014 letter from the 
Chairman and Ranking Member of the House Committee on Armed 
Services, the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) 
responded in a December 2014 letter that the Department would 
work with the committee to ``improve visibility into the 
content and funding'' for the NC3 system. The committee 
believes that an improved budget structure could ensure that 
the Department and Congress are in the best possible position 
to make available needed resources for the NC3 system.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense (Comptroller), in coordination with any Department of 
Defense offices as the Under Secretary deems useful, to provide 
a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later 
than September 30, 2015, that details the Under Secretary's 
views of the viability of options to improve the defense budget 
structure for such programs.

                      Nuclear Detection Capability

    The committee recently received a joint Air Force-National 
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) briefing, as directed in 
the committee report (H. Rept. 113-446) accompanying the Howard 
P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2015, on the requirements and plans for the nuclear 
detection capability. The committee notes that although the 
Secretary of State was also directed to be part of the 
briefing, there was no State Department representative at the 
briefing to the committee. The committee continues to be 
concerned about the long-term coordination between the 
Department of Energy, the Department of State, and the 
Department of Defense. The committee notes the March 2015 
Department of Energy/National Nuclear Security Administration 
report, ``Prevent, Counter and Respond--A Strategic Plan to 
Reduce Global Nuclear Threats (FY2016-FY2020),'' that 
recognized program challenges remains with regard to 
``sustaining a nuclear detonation detection sensor production 
rate and capability that aligns with [the Department of 
Defense's] changing satellite launch schedule and long-term 
procurement plans and requirements,'' and, ``identifying a 
long-term satellite host platform that addresses the 
requirement to maintain current nuclear detonation detection 
capabilities at geosynchronous altitude.'' The committee 
expects the Department of Defense, in coordination with the 
Department of Energy and the Department of State, to keep the 
committee informed on the way forward (including on the Space 
and Atmospheric Burst Reporting System), including 
identification of requirements and attribution of the 
requirements to a particular Department(s) or agency mission, 
and the specific current and future funding being provided by 
each Department or agency to meet each such requirement.

                       Nuclear Enterprise Review

    Following revelations about troubling lapses of integrity 
in the nation's nuclear forces, on February 10, 2014, the 
Secretary of Defense directed the initiation of comprehensive 
internal and external assessments of the health of all 
components of the Department of Defense's nuclear enterprise. 
According to recent testimony before the committee from a 
senior Department official, this ``Nuclear Enterprise Review 
(NER) highlighted evidence of systemic problems in the 
strategic deterrent forces that threaten the future safety, 
security, and effectiveness of our nuclear forces,'' and ``made 
clear the need to refocus attention and resources at all levels 
of the [Department of Defense] on this essential mission.''
    Upon conclusion of the Nuclear Enterprise Review in 
November 2014, the Secretary of Defense sent a ``Message to the 
Force on our Nuclear Enterprise'' saying, ``[o]ur nuclear 
deterrent plays a critical role in assuring U.S. national 
security, and it is [the Department of Defense's] highest 
priority mission. No other capability we have is more 
important.'' The Secretary appointed the Deputy Secretary of 
Defense to lead a group of senior leaders from the Department 
and the military services to address problems identified by the 
NER. This group, called the Nuclear Deterrent Enterprise Review 
Group (NDERG), has met regularly to provide oversight and 
direction to efforts by the Air Force and Navy to implement 
corrective actions. As a result of the NER and NDERG, the 
fiscal year 2016 budget request contained approximately $1.00 
billion in additional funding for the Department of Defense 
nuclear enterprise, with a total of $8.00 billion in additional 
funding planned over the next 5 years.
    The committee recognizes and applauds the robust personal 
engagement of the Deputy Secretary and the former Secretary in 
beginning to address these difficult and longstanding problems. 
The committee believes sustained leadership, follow-through, 
and investment will be required to ensure the revitalization of 
our nuclear enterprise, including in certain instances 
improving or changing the culture and leadership standards. The 
committee believes the NDERG seems to be successful in this 
regard, but cautions that institutionalization of such a 
process may be required to ensure sustained attention after key 
leaders depart. The committee expects the Secretary, the Deputy 
Secretary, and all leaders within the Department of Defense to 
ensure continued focus and resources for the Department's 
``highest priority mission.''

                     Operationally Responsive Space

    The budget request contained $6.5 million in PE 64857F for 
the Operationally Responsive Space (ORS) program. The committee 
is encouraged that this program was included in the budget 
request this year, although the funding is not enough to make 
substantial progress on addressing urgent warfighter space 
requirements. The committee recognizes and generally supports 
the concept that the Air Force Space and Missile System Center 
may leverage the ORS program office to execute urgent 
activities that are identified within other relevant space 
budget lines.
    Additionally, the committee is aware that leadership of the 
ORS program office will change over time due to normal 
rotations of assignments. Since the ORS is a jointly manned 
office, with a mission to meet joint military operational 
requirements, the committee recommends that the ORS Executive 
Committee consider an Army, Navy, or Marine Corps officer to 
serve as the military commander of ORS.
    Lastly, the committee is aware of potential urgent 
requirements for space situational awareness and space-based 
weather collection, and supports ORS concepts and management to 
meet these requirements. Therefore, the committee recommends 
$20.5 million, an increase of $14.0 million, in PE 64857F for 
the Operationally Responsive Space program.

Organization of the Military Service and Technical Intelligence Centers

    The committee is aware of disparities in the organization 
and command structure of the intelligence centers aligned to 
the military services and the Defense Intelligence Agency, 
namely the National Air and Space Intelligence Center, the 
Office of Naval Intelligence, the Marine Corps Intelligence 
Activity, the National Ground Intelligence Center, and the 
Missiles and Space Intelligence Center. The committee believes 
that there would be benefits in applying a similar organizing 
model and command structure across the centers, including 
increased efficiencies, best practices, and improved overall 
long-term performance.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Intelligence to review the current organization and 
command structure of the military service and technical 
intelligence centers and to provide a report to the 
congressional defense and the congressional intelligence 
committees by December 1, 2015, on the current structure of the 
centers and recommendations for improvements.

                      Patriot Product Improvement

    The committee is aware of the ongoing evaluation by the 
Department of Defense, including the U.S. Army, to determine 
the future path for investment in the lower tier of the U.S. 
Army's air and missile defense capability. The committee 
supports retention of U.S. technical superiority in integrated 
air and missile defense capability to protect U.S. deployed 
forces and allied forces.
    The committee therefore applauds the U.S. Army for 
thoroughly assessing future radar capabilities, beyond the 
currently deployed legacy system. The committee is aware of 
significant technological developments since the initial 
deployment of the Patriot radar capability, including active 
electronically scanned array and gallium nitride technology.
    Elsewhere in this Act, the committee includes a provision 
that would direct the Army to provide the analysis and 
recommendations of the analysis of alternatives for the Army's 
Lower Tier Integrated Air and Missile Defense Capability. The 
committee expects this review would thoroughly evaluate 
multiple facets of the sustainment and modernization of the 
Patriot air and missile defense system over the next 25 years, 
including modernization of the Patriot radar.

           Programmable Embedded Information Security Product

    The committee is aware that the Naval Research Laboratory 
has been working for a number of years on a new cryptographic 
system to more rapidly enable upgrading of encryption 
algorithms. This effort, known as PEIP, or the Programmable 
Embedded Information Security Product, is not tied to any 
hardware implementation, and thereby provides flexibility, 
adaptability, and the ability to be rapidly upgraded and 
modified over time. The committee recognizes that this approach 
is a vast improvement from the traditional method for upgrading 
and modifying cryptographic hardware and algorithms, which can 
be a time-consuming and lengthy process. The committee 
encourages the Navy and the Department of Defense to continue 
investing in ways to expand the functionality of the PEIP 
system and to use that as a model for future cryptographic 
modernization efforts.

              Protected Tactical Satellite Communications

    The committee recognizes the importance of protected 
satellite communications. In a statement for the record, the 
Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency informed the 
committee that ``Chinese and Russian military leaders 
understand the unique information advantages afforded by space 
systems and are developing capabilities to deny U.S. use of 
space in the event of a conflict. Chinese military writings 
specifically highlight the need to interfere with, damage, and 
destroy reconnaissance, navigation, and communication 
satellites. China has satellite jamming capabilities and is 
pursuing other antisatellite systems.''
    In response to the increasing foreign threat, the committee 
supports efforts that leverage existing military and commercial 
satellites to provide greater protection for the warfighter. 
The committee is aware of multiple ongoing activities within 
the Air Force to increase capacity of protected satellite 
communications. One such activity is a capabilities insertion 
program which will provide increased capacity on the Advanced 
Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) satellite through a software 
enhancement. Another activity is the development of a protected 
tactical waveform for commercial satellites and Wideband Global 
Satellite Communications (WGS). The committee is aware that 
these activities will provide different levels of protection 
but has not yet seen a strategic approach to address the 
warfighter requirements, including against a determined foreign 
adversary. Additionally, the committee believes that further 
evaluation of enterprise-level satellite communications ground 
architecture is necessary. This requires consideration of the 
ground command and control as well as user terminals. The 
warfighter will require situational awareness of the threat 
activity as well as options to rapidly respond to maintain the 
necessary warfighter capabilities. The committee recognizes 
that terminals, which represent a major driver for any 
architecture, will need to be considered in future concepts 
that are designed to permit flexible operations in threatened 
environments.
    The committee is aware of the benefits the Air Force has 
seen by co-locating space operations squadrons with 
complementary missions. The committee also believes that there 
may be opportunities for doing space operations more jointly, 
within the Air Force and Army for instance, as well as 
appropriately integrating commercial capabilities.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in 
coordination with the Commander of U.S. Strategic Command, the 
Secretary of the Air Force, and the Chief Information Officer, 
to provide the House Committee on Armed Services a briefing by 
December 15, 2015 on the requirements and plan to provide 
protected tactical communications to the warfighter through 
existing satellite programs; the necessary funding for such 
plan, and opportunities for acceleration as needed, in 
accordance with the highest priority warfighter requirements; 
and a strategic approach and concept definition for enterprise 
level satellite communications ground architecture for 
threatened environments.

                Quarterly Briefings on Strategic Forces

    The committee is concerned that certain matters are not 
reported to the committee in a timely way. For example, the 
committee had to learn about a recent weather satellite break-
up from press reporting rather than from the Department. The 
committee acknowledges the satellite in question was operated 
by another federal department; nonetheless, matters related to 
the break-up of satellites and the creation of debris are 
closely tracked by the Department and that information should 
be shared with the congressional defense committees as soon as 
practicable.
    The committee is concerned with the current reporting 
structure, or lack thereof, to keep the committee abreast of 
national security space-related issues. In an effort to resolve 
this, the committee is aware that the Commander of U.S. 
Strategic Command plans to take certain specific steps to 
address this. The committee welcomes this commitment. The 
committee expects prompt notification of matters related to 
national security space. The committee notes the Director of 
the National Reconnaissance Office has set a benchmark standard 
that the Commander should look to as he seeks to improve 
notifications to the congressional defense committees.
    The committee further notes that it is not just in the area 
of national security space where notification to the 
congressional defense committees needs improvement. The 
committee notes that several significant issues that prompted 
the Department's Nuclear Enterprise Review had not been 
disclosed to the committee and several specific problems in the 
Air Force component of the Department's nuclear enterprise were 
only made known to the committee through press reporting.
    To improve notification, the committee directs the Chairman 
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to provide quarterly briefings to 
the committee, starting June 1, 2015 and continuing through 
September 30, 2016, detailing the following: readiness and 
disposition of ballistic missile defense assets, including 
interceptors (including Patriot, THAAD, Aegis BMD ships and 
ashore sites, A/N TPY-2 radars); and readiness and disposition 
of assets and personnel in the nuclear triad (including 
ballistic missile submarines, intercontinental ballistic 
missiles, and nuclear certified heavy bombers), as appropriate.
    The committee notes that notifications concerning matters 
affecting national security space are being addressed through 
the aforementioned agreement with the Commander of U.S. 
Strategic Command, and the committee expects to be briefed on 
any major issue affecting national security space.

   Report on Current and Anticipated Global Demand for U.S. Missile 
                            Defense Systems

    The committee understands the significant requirement for 
limited quantities of missile defense capability. Therefore, 
the committee directs the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff 
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees not 
later than March 1, 2016, that includes the following 
information:
    (1) A quantitative assessment of the current demand and 
projected demand (in 5 and 10 years) for U.S. missile defense 
systems, including Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense cruisers, 
destroyers, and Aegis Ashore sites, Terminal High Altitude Area 
Defense batteries, Patriot batteries, and missile interceptors 
associated with such missile defense systems;
    (2) The current availability, projected availability (in 5 
and 10 years) of such systems and interceptors;
    (3) An identification of the sources of demand for missile 
defense systems, including combatant commander requests, 
international commitments, and contingency plans;
    (4) An explanation of how demand for missile defense 
systems is adjudicated within the Department of Defense;
    (5) The current and projected costs (in 5 and 10 years) for 
missile defense capability across the Department of Defense, 
including as a percentage of the total defense budget; and
    (6) Any other matters the Chairman deems appropriate.

         Report on Improving Discrimination for Missile Defense

    The committee supports and commends the efforts of the 
Director of the Missile Defense Agency to invest in 
discrimination improvements to counter ballistic missile 
threats from states, including the Democratic People's Republic 
of North Korea and the Islamic Republic of Iran. These 
ballistic missile threats include increasingly complex 
countermeasures, threatening the U.S. homeland, its deployed 
forces, and allies. The committee agrees that improving this 
capability is important to achieving a higher degree of 
reliability, effectiveness, and efficiency, including improving 
shot doctrine.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the 
Missile Defense Agency to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees not later than October 15, 2015, on the 
cost, schedule, and options to accelerate and field 
discrimination improvements based on robust acquisition 
practices.

Report on Patriot Guidance Enhanced Missile Tactical Ballistic Missile 
                  Recertification for Allied Inventory

    The committee is aware that allied nations continue to 
acquire and maintain the Patriot Guidance Enhanced Missile 
Tactical Ballistic Missile (GEM-T) interceptor missile as an 
effective and efficient defense against lower-tier, air-
breathing threats. The committee is also aware that the Army 
has chosen not to maintain its own inventory of GEM-T 
interceptors through recertification. The committee is 
concerned not only about the resulting impact on the Army's 
magazine depth in countering lower-tier, air-breathing threats 
to deployed forces, but also the impacts to the inventories of 
these interceptors held by allies.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to provide a 
report to the congressional defense committees not later than 
March 1, 2016, that assesses the impacts of the Army's decision 
with respect to re-certification of its inventory of GEM-T 
interceptors on the industrial base, including at Army depots 
involved in maintaining this system, to ensure that allies will 
continue to be able to maintain their inventories of these 
interceptors for as long as technically safe and reliable. The 
report should also recommend any steps (along with estimated 
costs) that might be necessary to guarantee that allies will 
not lose their ability to re-certify their inventories as a 
result of the Army's decision. In addition, the Under 
Secretary, in consultation with relevant regional combatant 
commanders, should assess the impacts of the decision not to 
re-certify GEM-T on their plans and requirements, and what the 
cost would be to re-certify the system if a decision was made 
to do so. The committee further directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to provide 
an interim briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services on 
the report not later than January 15, 2016.

                Report on Strategic Missile Commonality

    The committee strongly supports the nuclear triad and is 
aware of the urgent need for modernization of all three legs of 
the triad. The committee is also aware of the substantial 
cumulative cost to accomplish this modernization. The committee 
seeks to further understand opportunities to accomplish this 
effort at reduced cost and without reducing capability or 
delaying modernization plans.
    Specifically, the committee is interested in assessing the 
potential to reduce or avoid certain costs by pursuing various 
types of commonality between the future ground- and sea-based 
strategic deterrent weapon systems. The committee notes that 
the Air Force plans to acquire a replacement weapon system for 
the Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile through 
the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) program, while the 
Navy continues the D5 sea-launched ballistic missile life 
extension program and will similarly require a replacement in 
the longer-term future.
    As these programs develop, the committee seeks to 
understand the opportunities for commonality and its impacts on 
program executability, technical and schedule risk, and 
potential cost savings or avoidances from pursuing commonality 
in components, subsystems, supply chain, logistics, or other 
elements affecting acquisition or lifecycle costs. While the 
committee believes the benefits of limited commonality may be 
substantial, the committee continues, as it stated in the 
committee's report accompanying the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (House Report 113-102), 
to urge the Department of Defense ``to use caution in 
implementing this approach to ensure that commonality does not 
lead to unacceptable risk of widespread impacts to the 
deterrent force, should a technical risk cause a common 
component or subsystem to fail.''
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, 
in coordination with the Secretary of the Air Force and the 
Secretary of the Navy, to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees, by November 30, 2015, on the benefits and 
risks of pursuing various types of commonality in these 
programs, including the range of possible options for 
commonality and any associated cost-reduction potential or 
technical risks.

                           Responsive Launch

    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 
(Public Law 113-66) directed the Department of Defense 
Executive Agent (EA) for Space to conduct a study on 
responsive, low-cost launch efforts. The study required a 
review of the existing and past efforts, an identification of 
the requirements that would provide the necessary military 
utility, viability for greater utilization of innovative 
methods, a consolidated plan for a way ahead, among other areas 
of review. While the committee has received an interim briefing 
on this study, the final report is overdue. The committee 
appreciated the briefing, but is disappointed in what appears 
to be an overall lack of attention, unity of effort, and 
strategic approach in this area.
    In general, the committee supports responsive, low-cost 
launch efforts to rapidly reconstitute or replenish critical 
space capabilities, and believes that the Department needs to 
appropriately investigate and develop this area, including 
launch and the appropriate payloads. Therefore, the committee 
encourages the EA for Space to work with the necessary 
stakeholders in the Department and apply the resources to 
finish the study and provide a consolidated plan for 
development within the Department of Defense of an 
operationally responsive, low-cost launch capability in 
accordance with warfighter requirements.

         Roadmap for the Ground-based Midcourse Defense System

    The committee believes that as adversaries of the United 
States develop or acquire ballistic missiles, the United States 
must maintain, improve, and expand our capability to protect 
the homeland from ballistic missile attack through the Ground-
based Midcourse Defense (GMD) System. The committee also 
believes that by 2020, the GMD system requires a significant 
block upgrade of an ALL-Up-Round (AUR) Ground Based Interceptor 
that incorporates a redesigned Exo-atmospheric Kill Vehicle; 
incorporating increased capability and reliability at much 
lower production and maintenance costs, an upgrade of the 
booster to eliminate obsolescence, and incorporate nuclear 
hardening and lightening protection. The committee further 
believes that the ground system supporting the GMD system must 
be improved to incorporate system modernization and upgrades to 
mitigate obsolescence, improve operations and reliability 
through re-architecturing, and upgrade the associated software 
to currently supported language. The committee also notes that 
the GMD system of 2020 needs to incorporate improved 
discrimination to address advanced complex threats that the 
system is most likely to encounter as the threat grows in 
numbers and complexity. The committee also notes the need to 
use robust acquisition practices as appropriate to avoid delays 
and cost increases.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the 
Missile Defense Agency, in coordination with the Under 
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 
Logistics, to provide to the congressional defense committees 
by February 15, 2016, a roadmap of recommended time-phased 
improvements that should be incorporated into the GMD program 
from 2016 to 2025 to ensure the viability of the GMD system 
paced ahead of the threat to the U.S. homeland from the growing 
threat of ballistic missiles.

                 Satellite Communications Interference

    The committee believes in the importance of a robust 
ability for the warfighter to monitor, detect, characterize, 
geolocate and report sources of radio frequency interference on 
U.S. military and commercial satellites that are in direct 
support of combatant commanders. The committee is concerned 
that the Department has not developed a clear strategy to meet 
the related warfighter requirements. Therefore, the committee 
directs the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 
Technology, and Logistics, in coordination with the Commander 
of U.S. Strategic Command and the Secretary of the Air Force, 
to provide a briefing to the House Armed Services Committee by 
September 15, 2015 on the related JROC-validated requirements; 
identification of current SATCOM interference monitoring 
activities and funding within the Department; cost-benefit 
analysis of options to meet the requirements; and a recommended 
strategy including a description of future program, or 
programs, and funding to meet the requirements. The committee 
would be concerned if the Department of Defense made any 
substantial changes to the counter-electromagnetic interference 
programs of record, including EAGLE SENTRY and ARC STORM, 
before providing the required briefing.

     Satellite Ground Systems and Overhead Persistent Infrared Data

    The committee is aware that the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics is developing a 
Department-wide long-term plan for satellite ground control 
systems in response to Section 822 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66). 
With military personnel reductions and more austere budgets, it 
has become an imperative that the Department identify the most 
efficient and effective method to meet associated military 
requirements. The committee is aware that satellite control 
functions are accomplished routinely by commercial industry for 
very large satellite constellations. As such, industry may be 
able to accomplish some of the military's ground control 
activities in a secure, reliable, and cost effective manner. 
This approach would allow military space operators to focus on 
operating satellite payloads that deliver military effects on 
the battlefield and to invest in areas that only the military 
can do, which includes protecting and defending space assets. 
Therefore, the committee encourages the Under Secretary to 
include the potential contribution of commercial industry in 
the long-term plan for satellite ground control systems.
    Separately, regarding overhead persistent infrared (OPIR), 
the committee is aware that the data is classified and used for 
multiple purposes by the Department including missile warning, 
missile defense, battlespace awareness, and technical 
intelligence. OPIR data may also be very useful in civil 
applications, including firefighting, but the civil agencies 
and first responders may not currently have timely access to 
relevant data. Therefore, the committee encourages the Air 
Force to consider methods that would enable the 
declassification of certain appropriate OPIR data to support 
civil agencies.

                  Science and Technology Intelligence

    The committee remains concerned about the ability of the 
Department of Defense and the Intelligence Community to 
maintain the level of awareness needed to understand the impact 
of various advances in science and technology, and their impact 
on national security. The Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology and Logistics has written and spoken on 
the eroding technological superiority of the United States 
compared to the efforts of potential adversaries. Maintaining 
visibility into those technological developments will be a 
challenge for the Intelligence Community, both to inform the 
acquisition community, but also to provide some strategic 
warning for operational planners that will have to incorporate 
needed insights of technology trends into their plans. For that 
reason, the Under Secretary has also specifically called for a 
stronger relationship between the acquisition, requirements and 
intelligence communities as part of the Better Buying Power 3.0 
initiative.
    The committee also recognizes that the Intelligence 
Community is grappling with how to deal with the issue of 
maintaining global awareness of technological advances to 
prevent surprise and support the acquisition process. The 
unclassified ``Report of the National Commission for the Review 
of the Research and Development Programs of the United States 
Intelligence Community'' made several key findings and 
recommendations in this area. In particular, the commission 
called for comprehensive strategic scientific and technical 
intelligence to improve understanding of foreign strategies for 
science and technology development and to use such assessments 
for planning and resource allocation.
    The committee applauds recent efforts by the Department of 
Defense science and technology (S&T) community to reinvigorate 
its relationship with the intelligence community, including the 
establishment of an Office of Technical Intelligence within the 
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and 
Engineering and development of an Intelligence Needs lan in 
order to formally convey the S&T communities' intelligence 
requirements to the Intelligence Community. The committee 
believes that such efforts are important in order to position 
science and technology for the development of capabilities for 
new and emerging threat areas. The committee encourages both 
the Department and the Intelligence Community to continue to 
make progress in strengthening the role of science and 
technology intelligence in both enterprises.

             Smart Building Cyber Vulnerability Assessment

    The committee recognizes that Department of Defense 
facilities are transitioning to smart buildings increasingly 
utilizing wireless controls for heating, ventilation and air 
conditioning, security systems, lighting, electrical power, 
fire alarms, elevators, visitor controls, cellular 
communications, Wi-Fi networks, and first responder 
communications and other systems are increasing interconnected 
and online. This higher connectivity has increased the threat 
and vulnerability to cyber-attacks. A recent Government 
Accountability Office study (GAO-15-6) highlighted the 
vulnerabilities and cyber risks to building and access control 
systems. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed 
Services by January 1, 2016 on the cyber risks to smart 
buildings and access control systems from radio frequency 
systems and wireless communications, and identification of 
available technologies and practices available to potentially 
counter and mitigate the identified security risks.

                      Space Situational Awareness

    The committee continues to support improvements to the 
space surveillance network (SSN) of the United States. Ground-
based optical systems are a critical component of the SSN. The 
committee encourages the Secretary of the Air Force to 
incorporate emerging technologies in order to accelerate 
augmentation or replacement of the legacy ground-based optical 
systems in support of U.S. Strategic Command requirements.

                               Spaceports

    The committee is aware of commercially licensed spaceports 
and range complexes, including ones which also receive funding 
from State and local governments. Regarding national security 
space launch, these spaceports may offer potential schedule 
flexibility for missions that fit within the spaceport's launch 
parameters. The spaceports may also provide backup capabilities 
for increased resilience.
    Section 1617 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' 
McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 
(Public Law 113-291) directed the Secretary of the Air Force to 
provide a briefing on range support for launches in support of 
national security. As part of the briefing, the committee 
encourages the Secretary of the Air Force to evaluate the broad 
national security space launch infrastructure requirements and 
priorities, including an assessment of the potential role of 
commercial and State-sponsored launch infrastructure in 
supporting such requirements.

              Strategic Deterrence Research and Education

    In the committee report (H. Rept. 113-102) accompanying the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, the 
committee noted that ``challenges remain in educating airmen on 
their role in safeguarding national security. Educating the 
warfighters who execute the daily mission of nuclear deterrence 
remains a critical element to ensuring the level of excellence 
required for the mission.''
    In the committee report (H. Rept. 113-446) accompanying the 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015, the committee noted that ``the [Secretary 
of Defense] should take appropriate steps to refocus the 
military member education to ensure it is adequately covering, 
across-the-board, the essentials of nuclear deterrence policy 
and operations (including such concepts as strategic stability 
and escalation control)''.
    In addition, the 2014 study by the National Research 
Council titled, ``U.S. Air Force Strategic Deterrence Analytic 
Capabilities,'' identified a continued deficiency in the 
science and research of nuclear deterrence and assurance. The 
Council found that, ``The Air Force, working with its Service 
partners and the Department of Defense more generally, should 
pursue research on deterrence and assurance with a coherent 
approach that involves content analysis, leadership profiling, 
abstract modeling, and gaming and simulations as a suite of 
methods. It should organize its investments in analytic and 
other activities accordingly.''
    The committee also notes that today's geopolitical 
environment presents various threats and opportunities related 
to nuclear deterrence. With several internal reviews and 
outside assessments suggesting an increased focus on strategic 
deterrence education and research programs, and the committee's 
multi-year emphasis on this subject, the committee seeks more 
clarity on the concrete actions taken by the Secretary of the 
Air Force, as well as future plans, for strengthening nuclear 
deterrence education and research within the Air Force.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees by March 1, 2016, on the steps taken by various 
elements of the Air Force to improve service member education 
on nuclear deterrence and establish a sustainable, coherent, 
and robust strategic deterrence research program. Such 
education and research program should include examining the 
linkages among strategic deterrence and assurance, strategic 
stability, escalation control, missile defense, strategic 
conventional capabilities, nuclear terrorism, and 
nonproliferation efforts. This report should provide an 
overview of recent actions, as well a multi-year plan, to 
develop and sustain a research program that addresses the 
deficiencies identified by the National Research Council and 
other groups. The committee encourages the Secretary to 
leverage academia, industry, the other services, and other 
Government partners to meet the needs of this program.

                 Strengthening National Security Space

    The committee is aware of the strategic challenges due to a 
growing foreign threat to national security space. At a recent 
Subcommittee on Strategic Forces hearing, a senior Department 
of Defense official stated in a statement for the record that, 
``today the U.S. is not adequately prepared for a conflict, 
which might extend to space.'' The committee is concerned by 
this inadequate posture.
    However, the committee recognizes and commends the 
Department on the considerable analysis that has been done 
throughout the past year to develop an initial plan to assure 
space capabilities. As a result of the analysis, the Department 
has planned for substantial additional resources over the next 
5 fiscal years for space security-related activities.
    While investment in capabilities is essential, the 
committee also believes that in order to address the challenges 
posed by the increasingly contested space environment that the 
Department has described, the Department should review the 
organization and management of space activities within the 
Department of Defense to ensure that it is organized most 
effectively to address these challenges. Elsewhere in this Act, 
the committee includes a provision that would direct the 
establishment of a major force program for space with a plan 
for more unified authorities. Consistent with previous 
independent commissions, however, the committee believes this 
is only the first step that the Department should take to 
strengthen national security space.
    Therefore, in recognition of the changing space 
environment, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in 
coordination with the Director of National Intelligence and the 
Director of the Office of Management and Budget, to submit to 
the congressional defense committees and the congressional 
intelligence committees by December 1, 2015, a plan that 
strengthens national security space stewardship, leadership, 
management, and organization within the Department of Defense, 
including the National Reconnaissance Office, while 
streamlining decision-making and limiting unnecessary 
bureaucracy, and respecting the existing Director of National 
Intelligence authorities. Such plan shall identify and assess 
actions that achieve:
    (1) Greater unity of funding and authorities within the 
Department of Defense to prioritize national security space 
activities in accordance with defense and national security 
requirements;
    (2) Improved focus on Department of Defense space strategy 
and architectures that align to budgets and specific programs 
to provide coherence across the space domain, including space, 
ground, and user terminals;
    (3) Improved management of the Department of Defense space 
portfolio, to ensure that the Department of Defense, in 
cooperation with the Director of National Intelligence, 
facilitates strategic trades, identifies under-resourced areas 
and redundant functions, and more effectively manages the 
critical space industrial base;
    (4) Further appropriate integration of the space 
acquisition and operations of the Department of Defense 
military and intelligence activities; and
    (5) Any other matters the Secretary deems appropriate.

                        Study on Left-of-Launch

    The committee notes the November 5, 2014, memo to the 
Secretary of Defense from the Chief of Naval Operations and 
Chief of Staff of the Army about the U.S. ballistic missile 
defense strategy and developing a long-term holistic approach 
that addresses homeland missile defense and regional missile 
defense priorities. The committee is aware that the memo stated 
that, ``the recent Army-Navy Warfighter Talks highlighted the 
growing challenges associated with ballistic missile threats 
that are increasingly capable, continue to outpace our active 
defense systems, and exceed our Services' capacity to meet 
Combatant Commanders' demand.'' The memo concluded that, 
``[o]ur present acquisition-based strategy is unsustainable in 
the current fiscal environment and favors forward deployment of 
assets in lieu of deterrence-based options to meet contingency 
demands,'' and that, ``[n]ow is the opportunity to develop a 
longterm approach . . . that is more sustainable and cost 
effective . . . to balance priorities, inform resourcing 
decisions and restore our strategic flexibility.''
    The committee is aware that then-Secretary of Defense Hagel 
responded on February 4, 2015, that, ``[d]uring last fall's 
Strategic Portfolio Review (SPR), the Deputy's Management 
Action Group (DMAG) reviewed the question of how to address the 
growing GCC demand for regional BMD forces. The DMAG concluded 
that our current national BMD policy is sound, but an update to 
the 2011 Joint Capability Mix (JCM) sufficiency study was 
needed to inform force requirements and related issues for the 
FY 2017 Program and Budget Review.''
    The committee also notes that the ``Joint Integrated Air 
and Missile Defense: Vision 2020'' was released by the Chairman 
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on December 5, 2013, and stated, 
``the approach for [Integrated Air and Missile Defense] IAMD in 
2020 will be balanced, taking into account a full range of 
opportunities including diplomacy, a robust approach to passive 
defense both left and right of enemy launch, electronic 
warfare, active defense, and increased cooperation with our 
friends and allies.''
    The committee is also aware of several other ongoing 
reviews looking at regional ballistic missile defense and left-
of-launch (including an additional review proposed in another 
section of this Act), but believes there is good reason to 
specifically focus on a number of the elements referenced in 
the memo by the Chief of Naval Operations and the Chief of 
Staff of the Army.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, 
in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 
to submit to the congressional defense committees, not later 
than December 1, 2015, a report outlining how the concepts 
outlined in the ``Vision 2020'' plan authored by the Chairman 
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the memo authored by the 
Chief of Staff of the Army and the Chief of Naval Operations in 
November 2014, are being implemented, including left-of-launch 
opportunities and non-kinetic means of defense. The report 
should include the Secretary and the Chairman's evaluation of 
the feasibility and value of a missile defense strategy that 
increasingly relies on left-of-launch and non-kinetic means of 
defense against ballistic missiles; an analysis of the cost-
benefit for such an approach to complement current missile 
defense capabilities and strategy; a description of the 
programs involved in achieving such capability and the 
technology readiness levels of such programs if applicable, 
including projected costs to develop and deploy such 
capabilities; projected cost-savings; the acquisition strategy 
to develop and deploy such capabilities and an optimal timeline 
for their development and deployment; any impacts on force 
structure of the military departments; any impacts on the 
current ballistic missile defense strategy; and any related 
Department of Defense policy decisions in place or needed 
concerning the use of U.S. military options left-of-launch.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                      Subtitle A--Space Activities


  Section 1601--Major Force Program and Budget for National Security 
                             Space Programs

    This section would amend chapter 9 of title 10, United 
States Code, to establish a unified major force program for 
national security space programs to prioritize national 
security space activities in accordance with the requirements 
of the Department of Defense and national security. This 
section would also include an assessment of the budget for 
national security space programs for fiscal years 2017-20. This 
assessment, in report form from the Secretary of Defense, would 
provide an overview of the budget including a comparison 
between the current budget and the previous year's budget, as 
well as the current Future Years Defense Program and the 
previous one with specific budget line identification. This 
assessment would include any significant changes, priorities, 
challenges and risks related to the budget. The Secretary would 
also include any additional matters that the Secretary deems 
appropriate.
    In addition, this section would require the Secretary of 
Defense, not later than 180 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, to provide to the congressional defense 
committees a report on the plan to carry out the unified major 
force program, including any recommendations for legislative 
action the Secretary considers necessary to fully implement the 
plan.

    Section 1602--Modification to Development of Space Science and 
                          Technology Strategy

    This section would modify and streamline section 2272 of 
title 10, United States Code, by removing specific direction on 
elements of the strategy, coordination, and reporting 
requirements to Congress.

       Section 1603--Rocket Propulsion System Development Program

    This section would amend section 1604 of the Carl Levin and 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) by inserting a 
section on streamlined acquisition which would require the 
Secretary of Defense to use a streamlined acquisition approach, 
including tailored documentation and review processes.
    In addition, this section would clarify that, of the funds 
authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made 
available for fiscal year 2016 for the rocket propulsion system 
required by section 1604 of Public Law 113-291, the Secretary 
of Defense would be permitted to obligate or expend such funds 
only for the development of such rocket propulsion system, and 
the necessary interfaces to the launch vehicle, to replace non-
allied space launch engines by 2019 as required by such 
section.
    This section would also require the Secretary of Defense to 
provide a briefing to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
Senate and the House of Representatives, and make a briefing 
available to any other congressional defense committee, not 
later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act 
on the streamlined acquisition approach, requirements, and 
acquisition strategy.

 Section 1604--Modification to Prohibition on Contracting with Russian 
 Suppliers of Rocket Engines for the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle 
                                Program

    This section would amend section 1608 of the Carl Levin and 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291). As amended, this 
section would prohibit, with certain exceptions and a waiver, 
the Secretary of Defense from awarding or renewing a contract 
for the procurement of property or services for space launch 
activities under the evolved expendable launch vehicle program 
if such contract carries out such space launch activities using 
rocket engines designed or manufactured in the Russian 
Federation. This section would also prohibit the Secretary from 
modifying contract number FA8811-13-C-0003 awarded on December 
18, 2013, if such modification increases the number of cores 
procured under such contract to a total of more than 35.
    This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to waive 
one or both of the prohibitions if the Secretary determines, 
and certifies to the congressional defense committees not later 
than 30 days before the waiver takes effect, that the waiver is 
necessary for the national security interests of the United 
States, and the space launch services and capabilities covered 
by the contract could not be obtained at a fair and reasonable 
price without the use of rocket engines designed or 
manufactured in the Russian Federation.
    The prohibition on the award or renewal of a contract would 
not apply to either the placement of orders or the exercise of 
options under the contract numbered FA8811-13-C-0003 and 
awarded on December 18, 2013; or, subject to certification from 
the Secretary, a contract awarded for the procurement of 
property or services for space launch activities that includes 
the use of rocket engines designed or manufactured in Russia 
if, prior to February 1, 2014, the contractor had fully paid 
for such rocket engines or had entered into a contract to 
procure such rocket engines.
    The Secretary would not be authorized to award or renew a 
contract for the procurement of property or services for space 
launch activities described in the prohibition unless the 
Secretary, upon the advice of the General Counsel of the 
Department of Defense, certifies to the congressional defense 
committees that the offeror has provided to the Secretary 
sufficient documentation to conclusively demonstrate that the 
offeror meets the requirements of the exception.

  Section 1605--Delegation of Authority Regarding Purchase of Global 
                   Positioning System User Equipment

    This section would modify section 913 of the Ike Skelton 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public 
Law 111-383) by limiting the delegation of waiver authority to 
a level no lower than the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.

   Section 1606--Acquisition Strategy for Evolved Expendable Launch 
                            Vehicle Program

    This section would express the sense of Congress that the 
Secretary of the Air Force needs to develop an updated, phased 
acquisition strategy and contracting plan for the Evolved 
Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) program; that the acquisition 
strategy and contracting plan should eliminate the currently 
structured EELV launch capability (ELC) arrangement after the 
current contractual obligations; the Secretary should acquire 
launch services in a manner consistent with full and open 
competition; that the Secretary should be consistent and fair 
with EELV providers regarding the requirement for certified 
cost and pricing data, selection of contract types, and the 
appropriate audits to protect the taxpayer; and that the 
Secretary should consider various contracting approaches, 
including launch capability arrangements with multiple 
certified providers which continue to provide the necessary 
stability in budgeting and contracting, and flexibility to the 
Government.
    This section would require the Secretary to discontinue the 
ELC arrangement by the latter of either the date on which the 
Secretary determines that the obligations of the contracts 
relating to such arrangement have been met, or by December 31, 
2020. This section would provide a waiver to the 
discontinuation of the ELC arrangement if the Secretary 
determines that such waiver is necessary for the national 
security interests of the United States, the Secretary notifies 
the congressional defense committees of such waiver, and a 
period of 90 days has elapsed following the date of such 
notification.
    This section would also require the Secretary to apply 
consistent and appropriate standards to certified EELV 
providers with respect to certified cost and pricing data, and 
audits, in accordance with section 2306a of title 10, United 
States Code.
    Additionally, this section would require the Secretary to 
develop and carry out a 10-year acquisition strategy for the 
EELV program, in accordance with section 2273 of title 10, 
United States Code, and other elements of this provision. This 
acquisition strategy would establish a contracting plan that 
uses competitive procedures and provides the necessary 
stability in budgeting and acquisition of capabilities, and 
flexibility to the Federal Government. The strategy would 
ensure that a contract awarded for launch services, 
capabilities, or infrastructure specifically takes into account 
the effect of all Federal contracts entered into and any 
assistance provided to certified EELV providers, including the 
ELC; the requirements of the Department of Defense that are met 
by such providers including launch capabilities and pricing 
data; the cost of integrating a satellite onto a launch 
vehicle; and any other matters the Secretary considers 
appropriate.
    Also, in awarding any contract for launch services in a 
national security space mission pursuant to a competitive 
acquisition, the evaluation shall account for the value of the 
ELC per contract line item numbers in the bid price of the 
offer as appropriate per launch.
    This section would require the Secretary to provide to the 
congressional defense committees and the congressional 
intelligence committees, by not later than 180 days after the 
date of the enactment of this Act, a report on the acquisition 
strategy detailed within this section.

     Section 1607--Procurement of Wideband Satellite Communications

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
designate a senior Department of Defense official to procure 
wideband satellite communications, both military and 
commercial, to meet the requirements of the Department.
    This section would provide for an exception to the 
preceding requirement if an appropriate official (Secretary of 
a military department; Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics; the Chief Information 
Officer of the Department; or a combatant commander) determines 
that such procurement is required to meet an urgent need. This 
section would require the Secretary of Defense to provide a 
report to the congressional defense committees not later than 
March 1, 2017, and each year thereafter through 2021, with a 
brief description of the urgent need, the date, the length of 
the contract, and the value of such contract.
    Finally, this section would also require the Secretary of 
Defense to submit to the congressional defense committees, not 
later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this 
Act, a plan for the Secretary to meet the requirements of the 
Department for satellite communications, including 
identification of roles and responsibilities.

Section 1608--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Weather Satellite 
                            Follow-On System

    This section would limit any funds authorized to be 
appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal 
year 2016 for the weather satellite follow-on system until: (1) 
the Secretary of Defense provides a briefing to the 
congressional defense committees on a plan to address the 
requirements of the Department of Defense for cloud 
characterization and theater weather imagery; and (2) the 
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certifies to the 
congressional defense committees that such plan will not 
negatively affect the commanders of the combatant commands and 
will meet the requirements of the Department for cloud 
characterization and theater weather imagery.

    Section 1609--Modification of Pilot Program for Acquisition of 
              Commercial Satellite Communication Services

    This section would modify the pilot program for acquisition 
of commercial satellite communications services that was 
established pursuant to section 1605 of the Carl Levin and 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291). This section would 
require the Secretary of Defense to conduct the pilot program, 
while removing the requirement to use the working capital fund.
    The committee is aware of the Secretary's commercial 
satellite communications ``pathfinder'' efforts, the term 
currently used by the Department, to more effectively and 
efficiently acquire commercial satellite communications 
services. The committee believes these pathfinder efforts meet 
the intent and direction of the pilot program. Therefore, the 
committee would authorize multiple methods or pathfinder 
efforts to be used within the pilot program. Additionally, the 
Secretary would have to establish metrics to track the progress 
of meeting the objectives of the program. Lastly, the Secretary 
would be required to provide annual briefings on the progress 
of the pilot program, concurrent with the submission of the 
budget request in each year from fiscal year 2017 through 
fiscal year 2020.
    The committee recognizes that a great deal of work remains 
to be done, but the committee commends the efforts to date that 
the Secretary is putting forth in this area.

  Section 1610--Prohibition on Reliance on China and Russia for Space-
                           Based Weather Data

    This section would prohibit reliance on space-based weather 
data from the Government of the People's Republic of China or 
the Government of the Russian Federation, and would require the 
Secretary of Defense to certify that the Department of Defense 
does not rely on, or in the future does not plan to rely on, 
space-based weather data for national security purposes, that 
is provided by the Government of the People's Republic of 
China, the Government of the Russian Federation, or an entity 
owned or controlled by the Government of China or the 
Government of Russia.

Section 1611--Evaluation of Exploitation of Space-based Infrared System 
                       Against Additional Threats

    This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in cooperation with 
the Secretary of the Navy, the Secretary of the Air Force, and 
the Director of National Intelligence, to conduct an evaluation 
of the Space-based Infrared System to detect, track, and 
target, or develop the capability to do the detect, track and 
target, against the full-range of threats to the United States, 
deployed members of the Armed Forces, and the allies of the 
United States, and provide the results of such evaluation to 
the congressional defense committees not later than December 
31, 2016. Further discussion related to this section is 
contained in the classified annex to this report.

  Section 1612--Plan on Full Integration and Exploitation of Overhead 
                     Persistent Infrared Capability

    This section would require that the Commander, U.S. 
Strategic Command and the Director, Cost Assessment and Program 
Evaluation jointly submit to the appropriate congressional 
committees a plan for the integration of overhead persistent 
infrared (OPIR) capabilities to support specified mission 
capabilities of the Department of Defense. These mission areas 
include strategic missile warning, missile defense, and 
tactical intelligence (for example, the capability to detect 
illicit weapons of mass destruction-related shipments).
    The section would also require the Secretary of Defense, in 
the budget justification materials to accompany the annual 
budget submission, to certify that the plan on integration of 
OPIR capabilities is implemented under the budget submission.
    The committee recognizes that requirements for OPIR 
capability are not driven exclusively by the Department of 
Defense. The committee expects the Department's plan will focus 
on defense exploitation of OPIR, and it should not impose costs 
on other customers who will need to use this data.

          Section 1613--Options for Rapid Space Reconstitution

    This section would state the sense of Congress regarding 
rapid reconstitution of critical space capabilities. It would 
also direct the Secretary of Defense to evaluate options for 
the use of current assets of the Department of Defense for the 
purpose of rapid reconstitution of critical space-based 
warfighter enabling capabilities and provide a briefing to the 
congressional defense committees not later than March 31, 2016.

            Section 1614--Sense of Congress on Space Defense

    This section would state a sense of Congress regarding 
space defense, as outlined in the National Space Policy of 
2010.

  Section 1615--Sense of Congress on Missile Defense Sensors in Space

    This section would state the sense of Congress that a 
robust multi-mission space sensor network will be vital to 
ensuring a strong missile defense system.

  Subtitle B--Defense Intelligence and Intelligence-Related Activities


    Section 1621--Executive Agent for Open-Source Intelligence Tools

    This section would amend chapter 21 of title 10, United 
States Code, by adding a new section that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to designate a senior official of the 
Department of Defense to act as an executive agent for open 
source intelligence tools.

   Section 1622--Waiver and Congressional Notification Requirements 
   Related to Facilities for Intelligence Collection or for Special 
                           Operations Abroad

    This section would modify section 2682 of title 10, United 
States Code, regarding the requirement to accomplish 
maintenance and repair of a real property facility for an 
activity or agency of the Department of Defense (other than a 
military department) by or through a military department 
designated by the Secretary of Defense. Section 2682(c) 
provides the Secretary of Defense with the authority to waive 
this requirement if necessary to provide security for 
authorized intelligence collection or special operations 
activities abroad undertaken by the Department of Defense. This 
section would modify the waiver requirement to include a 
notification requirement for the Secretary of Defense to the 
congressional defense committees and the congressional 
intelligence committees when waiver authority is used and to 
sunset the waiver authority on December 31, 2017.

      Section 1623--Prohibition on National Intelligence Program 
                             Consolidation

    This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from 
using any of the funds authorized to be appropriated or 
otherwise made available to the Department of Defense during 
the period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act 
and ending on December 31, 2016, to execute: the separation of 
the portion of the Department of Defense budget designated as 
part of the National Intelligence Program from the rest of the 
Department of Defense budget; the consolidation of the portion 
of the Department of Defense budget designated as part of the 
National Intelligence Program within the Department of Defense 
budget; or the establishment of a new appropriations account or 
appropriations account structure for such funds.

   Section 1624--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Distributed 
                    Common Ground System of the Army

    This section would limit the availability of funds for the 
Army's Distributed Common Ground System to 75 percent of the 
funds authorized to be obligated by the program until the 
Secretary of the Army conducts a review of the program planning 
and submits the findings of such review to the congressional 
defense committees and the congressional intelligence 
committees.

   Section 1625--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Distributed 
  Common Ground System of the United States Special Operations Command

    This section would limit the availability of funds for the 
Special Operations Command's Distributed Common Ground System 
to 75 percent of the funds authorized to be obligated by the 
program until the Commander of U.S. Special Operations Command 
conducts a review of the program planning and submits the 
findings of such review to the congressional defense committees 
and the congressional intelligence committees.

  Section 1626--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Office of the 
              Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence

    This section would prohibit the obligation or expenditure 
of 25 percent of the funds authorized to be appropriated by 
this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for 
the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence 
(OUSD(I)) until the Secretary of Defense establishes the policy 
required by section 922 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66). Section 922 
required the Secretary to develop a written policy by June 24, 
2014, governing the internal coordination and prioritization of 
intelligence priorities of the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense, the Joint Staff, the combatant commands, and the 
military departments to improve identification of the 
intelligence needs of the Department of Defense.
    The committee understands that OUSD(I) is responsible for 
creating the required policy and is troubled that OUSD(I) has 
missed the statutory deadline.

  Section 1627--Clarification of Annual Briefing on the Intelligence, 
Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Requirements of the Combatant Commands

    This section would modify section 1626 of the Carl Levin 
and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) to include U.S. 
Special Operations Command within the annual briefing 
requirement by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on 
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance requirements to 
the congressional defense committees and the Permanent Select 
Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives and 
the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate.

         Section 1628--Department of Defense Intelligence Needs

    This section would require the Director of National 
Intelligence to provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees and the congressional intelligence committees on how 
the Director ensures that the National Intelligence Program 
budgets for the elements of the Intelligence Community that are 
within the Department of Defense are adequate to satisfy the 
national intelligence needs of the Department, as required by 
section 102A(p) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 
3024(p)). The report would specifically include a description 
of how the Director incorporates the needs of the Chairman of 
the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the commanders of the unified and 
specified commands into the metrics used to evaluate the 
performance of the elements of the Intelligence Community that 
are within the Department of Defense in conducting intelligence 
activities funded under the National Intelligence Program.
    While the committee applauds the continued efforts to 
integrate the Department of Defense and the Intelligence 
Community, it is critical to ensure that unique warfighter 
needs remain a priority at the national level and are 
incorporated into the metrics used to assess performance under 
the National Intelligence Program.

   Section 1629--Report on Management of Certain Programs of Defense 
                         Intelligence Elements

    This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Intelligence to review the Science and Technology Research 
and Foreign Material Exploitation work being conducted by the 
intelligence elements of the Department of Defense and 
recommend any changes and realignment of organizations that 
should take place.
    The committee believes that there are significant synergies 
and potential savings to be gained through consolidation of 
these activities within the intelligence elements of the 
Department of Defense.

 Section 1630--Government Accountability Office Review of Intelligence 
                Input to the Defense Acquisition Process

    This section would require the Comptroller General of the 
United States to carry out a comprehensive review of the 
processes and procedures for the integration of intelligence 
into the Department of Defense acquisition process. The review 
would include the integration of intelligence on foreign 
capabilities into the acquisition process from initial 
requirement through deployment, including staffing and training 
of intelligence personnel assigned to the program offices, as 
well as the procedures for identifying opportunities for weapon 
systems to collect intelligence, and accounting for the support 
requirements the weapon systems will place on the Defense 
Intelligence Enterprise once fielded.
    The committee believes it is important to ensure that the 
Department is taking into consideration both intelligence 
assessments of potential adversaries, as well as the exquisite 
intelligence required to make new weapon systems work to their 
fullest potential.

                 Subtitle C--Cyberspace-Related Matters


   Section 1641--Codification and Addition of Liability Protections 
 Relating to Reporting on Cyber Incidents or Penetrations of Networks 
             and Information Systems of Certain Contractors

    This section would codify and amend section 941 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public 
Law 112-239) as a new section 393 of title 10, United States 
Code, and also amend section 391 of such title, to provide for 
liability protection for covered contractors reporting cyber 
incidents to the Department of Defense through these two 
statutorily required mechanisms.

                       Subtitle D--Nuclear Forces


 Section 1651--Organization of Nuclear Deterrence Functions of the Air 
                                 Force

    This section would require that, subject to the authority, 
direction, and control of the Secretary of the Air Force, the 
Chief of Staff of the Air Force shall be responsible for 
overseeing the safety, security, effectiveness, and credibility 
of the nuclear deterrence mission of the Air Force.
    This section would also require that, by March 1, 2016, the 
Chief of Staff designate a Deputy Chief of Staff to carry out 
the following duties: (1) provide direction, guidance, 
integration, and advocacy regarding the nuclear deterrence 
mission; (2) conduct monitoring and oversight activities 
regarding the safety, security, reliability, effectiveness, and 
credibility of the nuclear deterrence mission; and (3) conduct 
periodic comprehensive assessments of all aspects of the 
nuclear deterrence mission and provide such assessments to the 
Secretary and the Chief of Staff.
    This section would also require that, by March 30, 2016, 
the Secretary shall consolidate, to the extent the Secretary 
determines appropriate, under a major command commanded by a 
single general officer, the responsibility, authority, 
accountability, and resources for carrying out the nuclear 
deterrence mission. The major command would be made 
responsible, to the extent the Secretary determines 
appropriate, for carrying out all elements and activities 
related to nuclear deterrence, including nuclear weapons, 
nuclear weapon delivery systems, and the nuclear command, 
control, and communication system. The activities would include 
planning and execution of modernization programs; procurement 
and acquisition; research, development, test, and evaluation; 
sustainment; operations; training; safety and security; 
research, education, and applied science relating to nuclear 
deterrence and assurance; and such other functions of the 
nuclear deterrence mission as the Secretary determines 
appropriate.
    Finally, the Secretary would be required to submit a report 
to the congressional defense committees by January 1, 2016, on 
the plans of the Secretary and the resources required to 
implement this section.

  Section 1652--Assessment of Threats to National Leadership Command, 
                   Control, and Communications System

    This section would require the Council on Oversight of the 
National Leadership Command, Control, and Communications 
System, established by section 1052 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66), to 
collect and assess (consistent with the provision of classified 
information, and intelligence sources and methods) all reports 
and assessments conducted by the Intelligence Community 
regarding foreign threats, including cyber threats, to the 
command, control, and communications system for the national 
leadership of the United States and the vulnerabilities of such 
system to the threats.
    This section would also require that, in its annual report 
to the Congress, the Council include its assessment of such 
intelligence reports and assessments along with any plans to 
address such threats and vulnerabilities.

       Section 1653--Procurement Authority for Certain Parts of 
                Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Fuzes

    This section would authorize $13.7 million of the funds 
made available by this Act for Missile Procurement, Air Force, 
for the procurement of certain commercially available parts for 
intercontinental ballistic missile fuzes, notwithstanding 
section 1502(a) of title 31, United States Code, under 
contracts entered into under section 1645(a) of the Carl Levin 
and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291).

Section 1654--Annual Briefing on the Costs of Forward-Deploying Nuclear 
                           Weapons in Europe

    This section would require that, not later than 30 days 
after the date on which the President submits to Congress the 
budget for each of fiscal years 2016 through 2020, the 
Secretary of Defense shall provide to the congressional defense 
committees a briefing on specific costs related to forward-
deploying nuclear weapons in Europe.

   Section 1655--Sense of Congress on Importance of Cooperation and 
   Collaboration between United States and United Kingdom on Nuclear 
                                 Issues

    This section would express the sense of Congress that: (1) 
cooperation and collaboration under the 1958 Mutual Defense 
Agreement and the 1963 Polaris Sales Agreement are fundamental 
elements of the security of the United States and the United 
Kingdom, as well as international stability; (2) the recent 
renewal of the Mutual Defense Agreement and the continued work 
under the Polaris Sales Agreement underscore the enduring and 
long-term value of the agreements to both countries; and (3) 
the vital efforts performed under the purview of both the 
Mutual Defense Agreement and the Polaris Sales Agreement are 
critical to sustaining and enhancing the capabilities and 
knowledge base of both countries regarding nuclear deterrence, 
nuclear nonproliferation and counterproliferation, and naval 
nuclear propulsion.

  Section 1656--Sense of Congress on Organization of Navy for Nuclear 
                           Deterrence Mission

    This section would state that Congress finds that: (1) the 
safety, security, reliability, and credibility of the nuclear 
deterrent of the United States is a vital national security 
priority; (2) nuclear weapons require special consideration 
because of the political and military importance of the 
weapons, the destructive power of the weapons, and the 
potential consequences of an accident or unauthorized act 
involving the weapons; and (3) the assured safety, security, 
and control of nuclear weapons and related systems are of 
paramount importance.
    This section would also express the sense of Congress that: 
(1) the Navy has repeatedly demonstrated the commitment and 
prioritization of the Navy to the nuclear deterrence mission of 
the Navy; (2) the emphasis of the Navy on ensuring a safe, 
secure, reliable, and credible sea-based nuclear deterrent 
force has been matched by an equal emphasis on ensuring the 
assured safety, security, and control of nuclear weapons and 
related systems ashore; and (3) the Navy is commended for the 
actions it has taken subsequent to the 2014 Nuclear Enterprise 
Review to ensure continued focus on the nuclear deterrent 
mission by all ranks within the Navy, including the 
clarification and assignment of specific responsibilities and 
authorities within the Navy contained in OPNAV Instruction 
8120.1 and SECNAV Instruction 8120.1B.

                  Subtitle E--Missile Defense Programs


    Section 1661--Prohibitions on Providing Certain Missile Defense 
                   Information to Russian Federation

    This section would prohibit the use of funds authorized to 
be appropriated for the Department of Defense to provide the 
Russian Federation with ``hit-to-kill'' technology and 
telemetry data for missile defense interceptors or target 
vehicles.
    This section would also prohibit the use of funds 
authorized to be appropriated for the Department of Defense to 
provide Russia with information relating to the velocity at 
burnout of missile defense interceptors or targets of the 
United States, or classified or otherwise controlled missile 
defense information.
    This section would provide the President with a single use 
waiver to provide Russia with information regarding ballistic 
missile early warning in the event the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff, the Commander, U.S. Strategic Command, and the 
Commander, U.S. European Command, jointly certify to the 
President and the congressional defense committees that the 
provision of such information is required because of a failure 
of the early warning system of Russia.
    The prohibitions established by this section would expire 
on January 1, 2031.

Section 1662--Prohibition on Integration of Missile Defense Systems of 
          China into Missile Defense Systems of United States

    This section would prohibit the obligation or expenditure 
of any funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act for 
fiscal year 2016 for the integration of a missile defense 
system of the People's Republic of China into any missile 
defense system of the United States.

Section 1663--Prohibition on Integration of Missile Defense Systems of 
 Russian Federation into Missile Defense Systems of United States and 
                                  NATO

    This section would prohibit the use of funds authorized to 
be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for 
fiscal year 2016 for the Department of Defense or for 
contributions of the United States to the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization (NATO) to integrate a missile defense system of 
the Russian Federation into any missile defense system of the 
United States or NATO.
    The prohibition in this section would expire at the end of 
fiscal year 2031.

   Section 1664--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Long-Range 
                          Discriminating Radar

    This section would state the sense of the Congress 
concerning the priority of the Long-Range Discriminating Radar 
(LRDR) for improving the ballistic missile defense system and 
achieving operational status of the LRDR in 2020.
    This section would provide that no funds authorized to be 
appropriated may be obligated or expended for military 
construction for the LRDR (other than for planning and design) 
until (1) the Director of Cost Assessment and Program 
Evaluation (CAPE) submits an assessment to the congressional 
defense committees concerning the cost of the MDA sensor 
architecture required if such radar is based at certain 
potential sites; (2) the Commander, U.S. Strategic Command and 
the Commander, U.S. Northern Command jointly certify the 
proposed site for the LRDR best supports missile defense and 
space situational awareness and is the most cost-effective 
option, as informed by the CAPE assessment; and (3) such 
certification has been submitted to the congressional defense 
committees for at least 60 days.
    Finally, this section would require the Director of CAPE, 
not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this 
Act, to submit the CAPE assessment to the congressional defense 
committees, the Director of the Missile Defense Agency, the 
Commander of the United States Strategic Command, and the 
Commander of the United States Northern Command.

 Section 1665--Limitations on Availability of Funds for Patriot Lower 
          Tier Air and Missile Defense Capability of the Army

    This section would provide that none of the funds 
authorized to be appropriated for programs related to the 
Patriot lower tier air and missile defense capability that 
depend specifically on the results of the analysis of 
alternatives (AOA) regarding the Patriot lower tier air and 
missile defense capability of the Army, may be obligated or 
expended until the results of the AOA are submitted to the 
congressional defense committees.
    This section would also provide that the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics could waive 
the application of the limitation in this section if the Under 
Secretary determines that it is necessary to prevent an 
unacceptable risk to mission performance of the Patriot system 
and notifies the congressional defense committees of the 
decision to use such waiver authority.
    The committee understands that the AOA will be completed by 
September 2015, prior to the beginning of fiscal year 2016. The 
committee does not intend to limit funding for programs or 
technology that could support Patriot modernization regardless 
of the options chosen based on the AOA. The committee believes 
a modernized Patriot capability is vital to a robust air and 
missile defense capability of the Army, and that such 
capability is further required for the protection of deployed 
U.S. Armed Forces and allied forces. The committee is committed 
to the modernization of Patriot and, elsewhere in this Act, 
recommends full funding of the budget request for these 
activities.

   Section 1666--Integration and Interoperability of Air and Missile 
               Defense Capabilities of the United States

    This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and the Vice 
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to ensure the 
interoperability and integration of U.S. certain covered air 
and missile defense systems, including by directing operational 
testing that they determine is necessary to ensure militarily 
useful interoperability and integration of such systems.
    This section would further require that the Director of the 
Missile Defense Agency and the Secretary of the Army conduct a 
minimum of at least one intercept or flight test per year that 
demonstrates interoperable and integrated air and missile 
defense capability. The Director and the Secretary of the Army 
would be authorized to waive this subsection if the Under 
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics 
determines such waiver is necessary and submits to the 
congressional defense committees an explanation for how such 
waiver will not negatively affect demonstrating the 
interoperability and integration of the air and missile defense 
capability of the United States.
    For the purposes of this section, covered air and missile 
defense systems are Patriot air and missile defense batteries 
and associated interceptors and systems, Aegis ships and 
associated ballistic missile interceptors (including Aegis 
Ashore capability), AN/TPY-2 radars, and Terminal High Altitude 
Area Defense system batteries and interceptors.

    Section 1667--Integration of Allied Missile Defense Capabilities

    This section would require that, not later than 180 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commander, 
U.S. European Command, the Commander, U.S. Central Command, and 
the Commander, U.S. Pacific Command shall submit to the 
Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff an assessment of the opportunities for integration and 
interoperability of air and missile defenses of the United 
States with those capabilities of allies of the United States. 
This section would require the Secretary and the Chairman to 
submit such assessments to the congressional defense committees 
not later than 30 days after receipt from the combatant 
commander concerned.
    This section would further require the Secretary of Defense 
and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in cooperation 
with the Secretary of the Army and the Chief of Staff of the 
Army, and the Secretary of the Navy and the Chief of Staff of 
the Navy, to carry out the planning, risk assessments, policy 
development and concept of operations development necessary to 
assure the integration and interoperability of U.S. and allied 
air and missile defenses by December 31, 2016. The Secretary of 
Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff would be 
required to provide quarterly updates on the progress of such 
planning and related activities by not later than 270 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, and each 90 period 
thereafter, until such integration and interoperability has 
been achieved.
    For the purposes of this section, covered air and missile 
defense systems are Patriot air and missile defense batteries 
and associated interceptors and systems, Aegis ships and 
associated ballistic missile interceptors (including Aegis 
Ashore capability), AN/TPY-2 radars, and Terminal High Altitude 
Area Defense system batteries and interceptors.

           Section 1668--Missile Defense Capability in Europe

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
ensure the Aegis Ashore site to be deployed in the Republic of 
Poland has anti-air warfare (AAW) capability upon the site 
achieving full operating capability. This section would also 
require that the Aegis Ashore site in Romania be retrofitted 
with AAW capability not later than December 31, 2018. This 
section would further require the Secretary to evaluate the 
feasibility, benefit, and cost of using the evolved sea sparrow 
missile or the Standard Missile 2 in providing the anti-air 
warfare capability that would be required by this Act.
    This section would also require that the Secretary of 
Defense ensure a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) 
battery is available for rotational deployment to the U.S. 
European Command (EUCOM) area of responsibility not later than 
180 days after the enactment of this Act, as appropriate to 
respond to military requirements, unless required in another 
combatant command's area of responsibility. The Secretary would 
also be required to examine sites to pre-position such THAAD 
battery if such pre-position is necessary for military 
requirements.
    This section would also require that the Secretary study 
not fewer than three sites in the EUCOM area of responsibility 
for the deployment of a THAAD battery, in the event one is 
determined to be necessary and not fewer than three sites for 
the deployment of a Patriot air and missile defense battery, in 
the event one is determined to be necessary.
    The Secretary of Defense would be required to work with the 
Secretary of State to enter into any necessary agreements with 
prospective host nations and to coordinate with the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization.

 Section 1669--Availability of Funds for Iron Dome Short-Range Rocket 
                             Defense System

    This section would make available $41.4 million of the 
funds authorized to be appropriated by section 101 of this Act, 
and as specified in the funding table in section 4101, for the 
Government of Israel for components for the Iron Dome short-
range rocket defense system.
    This section would condition those funds such that they are 
available subject to the terms, conditions, and co-production 
targets specified for fiscal year 2015 the ``Agreement Between 
the Department of Defense of the United States of America and 
the Ministry of Defense of the State of Israel Concerning Iron 
Dome Defense System Procurement.''
    This section would also require that not less than 30 days 
prior to the initial obligation of these funds, the Director of 
the Missile Defense Agency and the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics shall jointly submit 
to the appropriate congressional committees a certification 
that the Agreement is being implemented as provided in the 
Agreement and an assessment detailing any risks relating to the 
implementation of such Agreement.

     Section 1670--Israeli Cooperative Missile Defense Program Co-
                Development and Potential Co-Production

    This section would authorize $165.0 million out of such 
funds as are authorized to be appropriated in section 101 of 
this Act, and as specified in the funding table in section 
4101, for procurement and coproduction of the David's Sling 
Weapons System and the Arrow 3 Upper Tier missile defense 
system. This section would further specify the terms and 
conditions that shall be achieved by the Director of the 
Missile Defense Agency and the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics prior to the 
disbursement of the authorized funds. These terms and 
conditions would include, achievement of the knowledge points 
and production readiness agreements within the current 
bilateral research, development, test, and evaluation 
agreements; matched funding by the Government of the State of 
Israel; the successful negotiation of a bilateral agreement 
between the United States and the Government of Israel; agreed 
co-production targets based on the teaming agreements for the 
co-development programs; and, certain other matters.
    The committee notes it recommends the authorization of 
these funds for procurement of missile defense system batteries 
and interceptors for the Government of Israel based on the 
availability of these funds as opposed to specific production 
goals (e.g., numbers of batteries or numbers of interceptors). 
The committee is mindful of the hundreds of millions of dollars 
already invested in the David's Sling and Arrow 3 programs 
during co-development of these systems. The committee remains 
committed, even during a constrained budget environment, to 
support the missile defense requirements of the Government of 
Israel.

   Section 1671--Development and Deployment of Multiple-Object Kill 
       Vehicle for Missile Defense of the United States Homeland

    This section would state the sense of the Congress that the 
ballistic missile defense of the U.S. homeland is the highest 
priority of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA); that the Missile 
Defense Agency is appropriately prioritizing the design, 
development, and deployment of the redesigned kill vehicle; 
and, the multiple-object kill vehicle (MOKV) is critical to the 
future of the ballistic missile defense of the U.S. homeland.
    This section would require that the Director of the Missile 
Defense Agency develop a highly reliable multiple-object kill 
vehicle for the ground-based midcourse defense system using 
best acquisition practices, with rigorous flight testing to 
occur by not later than 2020, and deployment of such vehicle as 
soon as practicable thereafter. This section would also require 
that the management of the MOKV program be undertaken by the 
Deputy Director of the Missile Defense Agency. This section 
would also require the Director of the Missile Defense Agency 
to provide the funding profile required for the MOKV program to 
the congressional defense committees not later than 30 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
    While the committee supports the development of the MOKV by 
MDA, it expects, and will conduct close oversight to ensure 
that such development does not interfere with the development, 
flight test and deployment of the Redesigned Kill Vehicle, also 
known as the CE-III kill vehicle.

                Section 1672--Boost Phase Defense System

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
prioritize technology investments to develop and field a boost 
phase missile defense system by fiscal year 2022; ensure that 
development and fielding of a boost phase missile defense 
system can benefit multiple warfighter requirements; continue 
development of high-energy lasers and high-power microwave 
systems as part of a layered architecture to defend ships and 
theater bases against air and cruise missile strikes; and 
encourage collaboration among the military departments and the 
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency with respect to high 
energy laser efforts carried out in support of the Missile 
Defense Agency.
    This section would also require the Director of the Missile 
Defense Agency to establish a senior level advisory group to 
recommend to the Director promising technologies that the 
Director can evaluate for use as a boost phase missile defense 
layer.
    Finally, this section would require the Director to provide 
a briefing to the congressional defense committees not later 
than May 1, 2016, on the recommendations of the senior-level 
advisory group; a plan for developing one or more programs of 
record for boost phase missile defense systems; and the views 
of the Director regarding the recommendations and plan.

      Section 1673--East Coast Homeport of Sea-Based X-Band Radar

    This section would require that the sea-based X-band radar 
(SBX) shall be relocated to a new homeport on the East Coast of 
the United States not later than December 31, 2020, and shall 
have an at-sea capability of not less than 120 days per year. 
Prior to executing the relocation, the Director of the Missile 
Defense Agency would be required to certify that the relocation 
will not impact the missile defense of Hawaii.
    This section would also require that not later than 60 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of 
the Missile Defense Agency shall begin siting studies, 
environmental impact studies (as necessary), and any other 
appropriate studies and evaluations to base SBX at a site on 
the East Coast.

 Section 1674--Plan for Medium Range Ballistic Missile Defense Sensor 
              Alternatives for Enhanced Defense of Hawaii

    This section would state the sense of Congress regarding 
ballistic missile defense sensor and sensor discrimination 
capability.
    This section would further require the Director of the 
Missile Defense Agency to conduct an evaluation of potential 
options for fielding a medium range ballistic missile defense 
sensor for the defense of Hawaii. Such evaluation would have to 
be submitted to the congressional defense committees not later 
than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

   Section 1675--Research and Development of Non-terrestrial Missile 
                             Defense Layer

    This section would require that, not later than 30 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of 
the Missile Defense Agency shall commence a concept definition, 
design, research, development, and engineering evaluation of a 
space-based ballistic missile intercept and defeat layer to the 
ballistic missile defense system.
    This section would further require that, not later than 1 
year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director 
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report 
on the findings of such concept development, a plan for 
developing one or more programs of record for a non-terrestrial 
missile defense layer, and the views of the director regarding 
such findings and plan. The Director would be required to brief 
the congressional defense committees on an interim basis not 
later than March 31, 2016.

           Section 1676--Aegis Ashore Capability Development

    This section would require the Director of the Missile 
Defense Agency, in coordination with the Chief of Naval 
Operations and the Chief of Staff of the Army, to evaluate the 
role, feasibility, cost, and cost benefit of additional Aegis 
Ashore sites and upgrades to current ballistic missile defense 
system sensors to offset capacity demands on current Aegis 
ships, Aegis Ashore sites, and Patriot and Terminal High 
Altitude Area Defense capability and to meet the requirements 
of the combatant commanders. Such evaluation should be 
submitted by the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff, after their review, not later than 120 
days after the date of the enactment of the Act.
    This section would further require that the Under Secretary 
of Defense for Policy and the Secretary of State shall jointly 
identify any obstacles to foreign military sales of Aegis 
Ashore or co-financing of additional Aegis Ashore sites. Such 
review would have to include the feasibility of host nation 
manning or dual manning with the United States and such host 
nations. The results of such review would have to be briefed to 
the specified congressional committees not later than 180 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act and a final report 
provided not later than one year after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
    Finally, this section would require the President to seek 
to enter into host nation agreements for Aegis Ashore sites and 
co-financing and co-development opportunities as appropriate if 
the sites meet the requirements of the combatant commanders.

 Section 1677--Briefings on Procurement and Planning of Left-of-Launch 
                               Capability

    This section would require the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs 
of Staff to provide the specified congressional committees a 
briefing on the military requirement for left-of-launch 
capability and any current capability gaps in meeting such 
requirement.
    This section would further require that not later than 180 
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
of Defense and the Director National Intelligence jointly 
provide a briefing to the specified congressional committees on 
the plan of the Secretary and the Director to develop and 
procure the left-of-launch capabilities described in the 
briefing to be provided by the Chairman.

            DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS

                                PURPOSE

    Division B provides military construction, family housing, 
and related authorities in support of the military departments 
during fiscal year 2016. As recommended by the committee, 
division B would authorize appropriations in the amount of 
$7,683,000,000 for construction in support of the Active 
Forces, Reserve Components, defense agencies, and the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization security infrastructure fund for 
fiscal year 2016.

           MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND FAMILY HOUSING OVERVIEW

    The Department of Defense requested $6,641,995,000 for 
military construction, $251,334,000 for Base Realignment and 
Closure (BRAC) activities, and $1,413,181,000 for family 
housing for fiscal year 2016. The committee recommends 
authorization of $5,873,003,000 for military construction, 
$251,334,000 for BRAC activities, and $1,413,181,000 for family 
housing in fiscal year 2016. The committee also recommends 
$532,000,000 for military construction for Overseas Contingency 
Operations military construction within title XXIX.

                       Section 2001--Short Title

    This section would cite division B of this Act as the 
``Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016.''

 Section 2002--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts Required to be 
                            Specified by Law

    This section would ensure that the authorizations provided 
in titles XXI through XXVII and title XXIX of this Act shall 
expire on October 1, 2018, or the date of enactment of an act 
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
2019, whichever is later.

                      Section 2003--Effective Date

    This section would provide that titles XXI, XXII, XXIII, 
XXIV, XXV, XXVI, XXVII, and XXIX of this Act shall take effect 
on October 1, 2015, or the date of enactment of this Act, 
whichever is later.

                 TITLE XXI--ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

                                SUMMARY

    The budget request contained $743,245,000 for Army military 
construction and $493,206,000 for family housing for fiscal 
year 2016. The committee recommends authorization of 
$663,245,000 for military construction and $493,206,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 2016.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


              Defense Generator and Rail Equipment Center

    The Defense Generator and Rail Equipment Center (DGRC) is 
currently located at Hill Air Force Base (AFB), Utah. This is 
the Department of Defense's sole organic capability for depot-
level repair and maintenance of rail stock and rail equipment, 
as well as certain types of large-scale power generation 
equipment. DGRC currently services not only the Army's 
nationwide rail fleet, but also rail equipment for the Air 
Force and the Navy.
    The committee notes that the DGRC's present location may 
interfere with the long-term viability of an Air Force Enhanced 
Use Lease project at Hill AFB. The committee also notes that 
the Army has conducted two cost studies for relocation of the 
DGRC from its present location to the Anniston Army Depot 
(ANAD), Alabama. The most recent cost validation, dated 
September 30, 2014, estimated the costs to relocate DGRC to 
ANAD to be $17.1 million. This included costs associated with 
military construction and the relocation of personnel and 
equipment. However, the committee also notes that the estimate 
examined only one-time costs for the relocation and did not 
account for the potential life-cycle savings gained from 
relocating the function to an Army installation. In addition, 
the estimate did not address the feasibility of a public-
private partnership with the State and local community that may 
assist in financing the costs of relocating the center. The 
committee also notes that if the DGRC were to stay in its 
present location at Hill AFB, the Army's tenant agreement with 
the Air Force would need to be renegotiated to account for 
increased operating costs to secure an isolated land parcel, 
plus the cost to construct new fencing and gates in accordance 
with Department of Defense Force Protection standards.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army 
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees by 
December 15, 2015, that revalidates the personnel, equipment, 
and military construction costs associated with a relocating 
the DGRC from Hill AFB to ANAD. The report should also address 
the life-cycle costs associated with the functions of DGRC 
remaining in place compared to relocating to ANAD, including 
the feasibility of a private-public partnership arrangement.

                   Explanation of Funding Adjustments

    The committee recommends reduction of funding for projects 
contained in the budget request for military construction and 
family housing. These reductions include:
    (1) $43.0 million for a Homeland Defense Operations Center 
at Joint Base San Antonio, Texas. The budget request included 
$43.0 million to provide a command and control facility in 
support of Army North, the Army Service Component Command of 
U.S. Northern Command. The committee believes that the 
requirements for this facility are undefined and the facility 
is early-to-need. As such, the committee recommends no funds, a 
decrease of $43.0 million, for this project.
    (2) $37.0 million for an Instruction Building at Joint Base 
Myer-Henderson, Virgina. The budget request included $37.0 
million to construct a training facility for the U.S. Army Band 
at Joint Base Myer-Henderson. The committee is sympathetic to 
the constraints of the existing facility, but does not support 
this requirement at this time. As such, the committee 
recommends no funds, a decrease of $37.0 million, for this 
project.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


    Section 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land Acquisition 
                                Projects

    This section would contain the list of authorized Army 
construction projects for fiscal year 2016. The authorized 
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis. 
The state list contained in this Act is intended to be the 
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each 
location.

                      Section 2102--Family Housing

    This section would authorize new construction and planning 
and design of family housing units for the Army for fiscal year 
2016.

      Section 2103--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
make improvements to existing units of family housing for 
fiscal year 2016.

          Section 2104--Authorization of Appropriations, Army

    This section would authorize appropriations for Army 
military construction at the levels identified in section 4601 
of division D of this Act.

  Section 2105--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal 
                           Year 2013 Project

    This section would modify the authority provided by section 
2101 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2013 (division B of Public Law 112-239) and authorize the 
Secretary of the Army to make certain modifications to the 
scope of a previously authorized construction project. This 
section was included in the President's request.

 Section 2106--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 2012 
                                Projects

    This section would extend the authorization of a certain 
projects originally authorized in section 2101 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (division B 
of Public Law 112-81) until October 1, 2016, or the date of the 
enactment of an act authorizing funds for military construction 
for fiscal year 2017, whichever is later. This section was 
included in the President's request.

 Section 2107--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 2013 
                                Projects

    This section would extend the authorization of certain 
projects originally authorized by section 2101 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (division B 
of Public Law 112-239) until October 1, 2016, or the date of 
the enactment of an act authorizing funds for military 
construction for fiscal year 2017, whichever is later. This 
section was included in the President's request.

  Section 2108--Additional Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal Year 
                             2016 Projects

    This section would authorize a military construction 
project in the amount of $6,000,000 to construct a multi-sport 
athletic field and track and perimeter road and fencing and 
acquire approximately 5 acres of land adjacent to the existing 
Sterrebeek Dependent School site in Brussels, Belgium, to allow 
relocation of Army functions to the site in support of the 
European Infrastructure Consolidation effort. In addition, this 
section would authorize a payment-in-kind project in the amount 
of $12,400,000 to construct a vehicle bridge and traffic circle 
to facilitate traffic flow to and from the Medical Center at 
Rhine Ordnance Barracks, Germany.

                 TITLE XXII--NAVY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

                                SUMMARY

    The budget request contained $1,605,929,000 for Navy 
military construction and $369,577,000 for family housing for 
fiscal year 2016. The committee recommends authorization of 
$1,361,925,000 for military construction and $369,577,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 2016.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                   Explanation of Funding Adjustment

    The committee recommends reduction of funding for several 
projects contained in the base budget request for military 
construction and family housing and recommends a transfer of 
these projects to the Overseas Contingency Operations title of 
this Act. These reductions include:
    (1) $37.7 million for the Mina Salman Pier Replacement at 
Bahrain. The budget request included $37.7 million to support 
berth requirements for homeported, forward deployed, and 
visiting ships in Bahrain. The committee supports this 
requirement. However, the committee recommends no funds in the 
base budget, a reduction of $37.7 million, for this project in 
order to transfer this project to Title XXIX, Overseas 
Contingency Operations Military Construction.
    (2) $52.1 million for the Ship Maintenance Support Facility 
at Bahrain. The budget request included $52.1 million to 
support forward deployed Littoral Combat Ships in Bahrain. The 
committees supports this requirement. However, the committee 
recommends no funds in the base budget, a reduction of $52.1 
million, for this project in order to transfer this project to 
Title XXIX, Overseas Contingency Operations Military 
Construction.
    (3) $62.3 million for the P-8 Hangar and Fleet Support 
Facility at Naval Air Station Sigonella, Italy. The budget 
request included $62.3 million to support squadron maintenance 
for P-8A aircraft operating at Naval Air Station Sigonella. The 
committee supports this requirement. However, the committee 
recommends no funds in the base budget, a reduction of $62.3 
million, for this project in order to transfer this project to 
Title XXIX, Overseas Contingency Operations Military 
Construction.
    (4) $40.6 million for the Triton Hangar and Operation 
Facility at Naval Air Station Sigonella, Italy. The budget 
request included $40.6 million to support operations and 
maintenance for the MQ-4C Broad Area Maritime Surveillance 
platforms operating from Naval Air Station Sigonella. The 
committee supports this requirement. However, the committee 
recommends no funds in the base budget, a reduction of $40.6 
million, for this project in order to transfer this project to 
Title XXIX, Overseas Contingency Operations Military 
Construction.
    (5) $51.3 million for the Aegis Ashore Missile Defense 
Complex at Redzikowo Base, Poland. The budget request included 
$51.3 million to support personnel operating the Aegis Ashore 
Missile Defense System in Redzikowo, Poland. The committee 
supports this requirement. However, the committee recommends no 
funds in the base budget, a reduction of $51.3 million, for 
this project in order to transfer this project to Title XXIX, 
Overseas Contingency Operations Military Construction.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


    Section 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land Acquisition 
                                Projects

    This section would contain the list of authorized Navy 
construction projects for fiscal year 2016. The authorized 
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis. 
The state list contained in this Act is intended to be the 
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each 
location.

                      Section 2202--Family Housing

    This section would authorize new construction and planning 
and design of family housing units for the Department of the 
Navy for fiscal year 2016.

      Section 2203--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to 
make improvements to existing units of family housing for 
fiscal year 2016.

          Section 2204--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy

    This section would authorize appropriations for Navy 
military construction at the levels identified in section 4601 
of division D of this Act.

 Section 2205--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 2012 
                                Projects

    This section would extend the authorizations listed, and 
originally included in section 2201 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (division B 
of Public Law 11281), until October 1, 2016, or the date of the 
enactment of an act authorizing funds for military construction 
for fiscal year 2017, whichever is later. This section was 
included in the President's request.

 Section 2206--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 2013 
                                Projects

    This section would extend the authorizations listed until 
October 1, 2016, or the date of the enactment of an act 
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
2017, whichever is later. This section was included in the 
President's request.

        Section 2207--Townsend Bombing Range Expansion, Phase 2

    This section would provide special conveyance authority to 
the Secretary of the Navy for two fire and emergency response 
stations as part of the land acquisition agreement to support 
emergency services for Townsend Bombing Range Expansion, Phase 
2, Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, Townsend, Georgia.

              TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

                                SUMMARY

    The budget request contained $1,354,785,000 for Air Force 
military construction and $491,730,000 for family housing for 
fiscal year 2016. The committee recommends authorization of 
$1,279,785,000 for military construction and $491,730,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 2016.

                       Items of Special Interest


                   Explanation of Funding Adjustment

    The committee recommends reduction of funding for several 
projects contained in the base budget request for military 
construction and family housing and recommends a transfer of 
these projects to the Overseas Contingency Operations title of 
this Act. These reductions include:
    (1) $50.0 million for Construct Airfield and Base Camp at 
Agadez, Niger. The budget request included $50.0 million for 
airfield infrastructure at Agadez, Niger, to support operations 
in western Africa. The committee supports this requirement. 
However, the committee recommends no funds in the base budget, 
a reduction of $50.0 million, for this project in order to 
transfer this project to Title XXIX, Overseas Contingency 
Operations Military Construction.
    (2) $25.0 million for an Airlift Apron at Al Musanah Air 
Base, Oman. The budget request included $25.0 million to 
construct an airlift apron in support of strategic and tactical 
aircraft at Al Musanah Air Base, Oman. The committee supports 
this requirement. However, the committee recommends no funds in 
the base budget, a reduction of $25.0 million, for this project 
in order to transfer this project to Title XXIX, Overseas 
Contingency Operations Military Construction.

                Former Norton Air Force Base, California

    The committee notes that Norton Air Force Base, California, 
was closed on March 31, 1994, as part of the 1988 Base 
Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process. The committee is aware 
that the Department of the Air Force conveyed portions of the 
Former Norton Air Force Base, to include land, improvements 
thereon, and easements, to the San Bernardino International 
Airport Authority by quitclaim deed on December 17, 1999. In 
addition to the 1999 quitclaim deed, the committee is aware 
that section 2851 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107) directed the 
Administrator of General Services to convey two avigation 
easements to the Inland Valley Development Agency. The 
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force, in 
coordination with the Administrator of the General Services 
Administration, to submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees not later than February 1, 2016, regarding the 
conveyance directed by section 2851 of Public Law 107-107. The 
report should discuss the ownership status of the land and 
easements associated with the Former Norton Air Force Base, the 
ability to complete the conveyance as directed by section 2851 
of Public Law 107-107, and the impact of the enacting 
legislation that results in the repeal or amendment of section 
2851 of Public Law 107-107.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


 Section 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land Acquisition 
                                Projects

    This section would contain the list of authorized Air Force 
construction projects for fiscal year 2016. The authorized 
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis. 
The state list contained in this Act is intended to be the 
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each 
location.

                      Section 2302--Family Housing

    This section would authorize new construction and planning 
and design of family housing units for the Air Force for fiscal 
year 2016.

      Section 2303--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force 
to make improvements to existing units of family housing for 
fiscal year 2016.

        Section 2304--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force

    This section would authorize appropriations for Air Force 
military construction at the levels identified in section 4601 
of division D of this Act.

  Section 2305--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal 
                           Year 2010 Project

    This section would modify the authority provided by section 
2301 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2010 (division B of Public Law 111-84) and authorize the 
Secretary of the Air Force to make certain modifications to the 
scope of a previously authorized construction project. This 
section was included in the President's request.

  Section 2306--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal 
                           Year 2014 Project

    This section would modify the authority provided by section 
2301 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2014 (division B of Public Law 113-66) and authorize the 
Secretary of the Air Force to make certain modifications to the 
scope of a previously authorized construction project. This 
section would also require a notification and 14-day wait 
period, or 7-day wait period if submitted via electronic 
medium, to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and 
the House of Representatives on the selected project location 
before commencing construction. This section was included in 
the President's request.

  Section 2307--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal 
                           Year 2015 Project

    This section would modify the authority provided by section 
2301 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015 (division B of Public Law 113-291) to authorize the 
Secretary of the Air Force to make certain modifications to the 
scope of a previously authorized construction project. This 
section was included in the President's request.

 Section 2308--Extension of Authorization of Certain Fiscal Year 2012 
                                Project

    This section would extend the authorization listed, 
originally provided by section 2301 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (division B 
of Public Law 112-81), until October 1, 2016, or the date of 
the enactment of an act authorizing funds for military 
construction for fiscal year 2017, whichever is later. This 
section was included in the President's request.

 Section 2309--Extension of Authorization of Certain Fiscal Year 2013 
                                Project

    This section would extend the authorization listed, 
originally provided by section 2301 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (division B 
of Public Law 112-239), until October 1, 2016, or the date of 
the enactment of an act authorizing funds for military 
construction for fiscal year 2017, whichever is later. This 
section was included in the President's request.

Section 2310--Limitation on Project Authorization to Carry Out Certain 
                        Fiscal Year 2016 Project

    This section would limit the Secretary of the Air Force 
from expending any funds authorized by this title that are 
associated with the construction of Joint Intelligence Analysis 
Complex Consolidation, Phase 2, at Royal Air Force Croughton, 
United Kingdom, until the Secretary submits a report on the 
continuity of operations considerations for the critical 
communications and intelligence capabilities located at or 
being located to Royal Air Force Croughton, United Kingdom. 
This section would also limit action to realign forces at Lajes 
Air Force Base, Azores, until the Secretary of Defense 
certifies that Lajes Air Force Base is not an optimal location 
for the Joint Intelligence Analysis Complex, or any of the 
critical communications or intelligence capabilities considered 
in the continuity of operations planning.

           TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

                                SUMMARY

    The budget request contained $2,300,767,000 for defense 
agency military construction and $58,668,000 for family housing 
for fiscal year 2016. The committee recommends authorization of 
$1,939,879,000 for military construction and $58,668,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 2016.

                       Items of Special Interest


                   Explanation of Funding Adjustments

    The committee recommends reduction of funding for several 
projects contained in the budget request for military 
construction and family housing. These reductions include:
    (1) $10.4 million for the Special Operations Force (SOF) 
Performance Resiliency Center-West at Camp Pendleton, 
California. The budget request included $10.4 million to 
support the U.S. Special Operations Command's Human Performance 
Initiative at Camp Pendleton. The committee continues to have 
concerns regarding the Human Performance Initiative. As such, 
the committee recommends no funds, a reduction of $10.4 
million, for this project.
    (2) $47.2 million for the SOF Logistics Support Unit One 
Ops Fac. #2 at Naval Base Coronado, California. The budget 
request included $47.2 million in support of air operations, 
operational gear storage and distribution, and combat services 
support at Naval Base Coronado. The committee notes that the 
utilities needed to support this facility are not available and 
are not programmed until fiscal year 2017. Without these 
utilities, the committee notes that the facility would not be 
complete and usable and believes that this project is early-to-
need based on the sequencing of the supporting utilities. As 
such, the committee recommends no funds, a reduction of $47.2 
million, for this project.
    (3) $20.0 million for the Operations Support Facility at a 
classified location. The committee has concerns regarding this 
project, and believes that the requested construction project 
may be early-to-need. As such, the committee recommends no 
funds, a reduction of $20.0 million, for this project.
    (4) $31.8 million for the Medical/Dental Clinic Replacement 
at Marine Corps Base Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii. The budget request 
included $122.1 million to construct a replacement clinic to 
provide primary medical care at Marine Corps Base Kaneohe Bay. 
The committee supports the requirement for this project and 
provides the full project authorization included in the budget 
request. However, the committee supports the authorization of 
appropriations in an amount equivalent to the ability of the 
military department to execute in the year of the authorization 
for appropriations. For this project, the committee believes 
that the Department of Defense has exceeded its ability to 
fully expend the funding in fiscal year 2016. As such, the 
committee recommends $90.3 million, a reduction of $31.8 
million, for this project.
    (5) $36.0 million for the Behavioral Health/Dental Clinic 
Addition at Schofield Barracks, Hawaii. The budget request 
included $123.8 million for a health clinic and dental clinic 
addition, as well as a new parking structure to support the 
beneficiary population at Schofield Barracks. The committee 
supports the requirement for this project, but believes that it 
would be more efficient to construct the parking structure in 
coordination with a future planned medical clinic project that 
also contains a parking structure. Therefore, the committee 
reduced the authorization for the project by $16.3 million. In 
addition, the committee supports the authorization of 
appropriations in an amount equivalent to the ability of the 
military department to execute in the year of the authorization 
for appropriations. For this project, the committee believes 
that the Department of Defense has exceeded its ability to 
fully expend the funding in fiscal year 2016. As such, the 
committee recommends $87.8 million, a reduction of $36.0 
million, for this project.
    (6) $0 million for the NSAW Recapitalization Building #2, 
Increment 1 at Fort Meade, Maryland. The budget request 
included a request for an authorization of $782.3 million, with 
a request for an authorization of appropriations of $34.9 
million in fiscal year 2016 for a new operations facility to 
support mission operations. The committee supports the 
requirements for this project but does not believe it is cost-
effective to spend $93.2 million on a parking garage when 
compared to the cost per parking space of a paved surface 
parking area. As such, the committee recommends an 
authorization of $692.0 million, a decrease of $93.2 million, 
for this project. In addition, the committee recommends full 
funding for the authorization of appropriations, as requested 
in the budget request, in the amount of $34.9 million in fiscal 
year 2016. In future budget requests, the committee expects the 
Department of Defense to seek additional authorizations of 
appropriations in an amount equivalent to the ability of the 
military department to execute in the year of the authorization 
for appropriations.
    (7) $2.5 million for the SOF 21 STS Operations Facility at 
Fort Bragg, North Carolina. The budget request included $16.9 
million to support training, planning, and equipping combat 
controllers at Fort Bragg and includes a project element in 
support of the U.S. Special Operations Command's Human 
Performance Initiative. The committee continues to have 
concerns regarding the Human Performance Initiative. As such, 
the committee recommends $14.4 million, a reduction of $2.5 
million, for this project.
    (8) $50.0 million for the Hospital Replacement, Increment 7 
at Fort Bliss, Texas. The budget request included $239.9 
million to support the replacement of a hospital that provides 
inpatient and outpatient care to the beneficiary population at 
Fort Bliss. The committee supports the authorization of 
appropriations in an amount equivalent to the ability of the 
military department to execute in the year of the authorization 
for appropriations. For this project, the committee believes 
that the Department of Defense has exceeded its ability to 
fully expend the funding in fiscal year 2016. As such, the 
committee recommends $189.9 million, a reduction of $50.0 
million, for this project.
    (9) $212.9 million for the Construct Fuel Storage and 
Distribution Facilities at Camp Lemonier, Djibouti, and the 
Aegis Ashore Missile Defense System Complex at Redzikowo Base, 
Poland, that was transferred to Title XXIX, Overseas 
Contingency Operations Military Construction.
    (10) $10.0 million for contingency construction at various 
worldwide locations. The budget request included $10.0 million 
to support contingency construction requirements not previously 
authorized by law. The committee notes that the Department of 
Defense has not requested a military construction project using 
funds from this account since 2008. In addition, the committee 
notes that unobligated balances remain available in the 
military construction account and other authorities exist to 
construct projects that are in keeping with a national security 
interest. As such, the committee recommends no funds, a 
reduction of $10.0 million, for this program.
    In addition, the committee recommends an increase of 
funding for projects contained in the budget request for 
military construction and family housing. These increases 
include:
    (1) $30.0 million for Arlington Cemetery Defense Access 
Roads at Arlington, Virginia. This project would realign 
roadways and supporting infrastructure to make the land 
previously known as the Navy Annex site contiguous to Arlington 
National Cemetery and increase burial space. The budget request 
did not include funding for this project, but it was included 
in the Army Chief of Staff's Unfunded Requirements List. As 
such, the committee recommends $30.0 million, an increase of 
$30.0 million, for this project.
    (2) $30.0 million for the Missile Defense Agency Military 
Construction Planning and Design activities for an East Coast 
site for homeland missile defense. The budget request did not 
include funding for this project. The committee recommends 
$30.0 million, an increase of $30.0 million, for this project.

               Red Hill Underground Fuel Storage Facility

    The committee is aware that the Commander, U.S. Pacific 
Command has stated that the Red Hill Underground Fuel Storage 
Facility ``serves as a critical asset supporting United States 
Pacific Command operations in peacetime and contingency'' and 
will ``remain vitally important to our security interests for 
the next thirty years.'' The committee is also aware that U.S. 
Pacific Command, the Department of the Navy, and the Defense 
Logistics Agency have determined the storage requirement to 
remain between 13 and 15 operational storage tanks at the 
facility, with the ability to bring additional tanks online at 
the end of the repair and modernization cycle should future 
requirements warrant.
    The committee is further aware that the Naval Facilities 
Engineering Command is currently conducting an engineering 
assessment to determine the best available practicable 
technological (BAPT) solutions for the recapitalization of the 
storage tanks to ensure long-term integrity and environmental 
compliance in a cost-effective manner. Therefore, the committee 
directs the Commander of the Defense Logistics Agency Energy, 
not later than 30 days after the date of approval of the BAPT 
by the regulatory agencies, to provide a briefing to the House 
Committee on Armed Services on the BAPT solutions and the 
proposed recapitalization plan for the Red Hill Underground 
Fuel Storage Facility. Once the BAPT solution is determined, 
the committee encourages the Defense Logistics Agency to 
proceed with efforts to recapitalize the Red Hill Underground 
Fuel Storage Facility as quickly as possible, subject to 
available resources.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


    Section 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and Land 
                          Acquisition Projects

    This section would contain the list of authorized defense 
agencies' construction projects for fiscal year 2016. The 
authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis. The state list contained in this Act is 
intended to be the binding list of the specific projects 
authorized at each location.

         Section 2402--Authorized Energy Conservation Projects

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
carry out energy conservation projects valued at a cost greater 
than $3.0 million at the amounts authorized for each project at 
a specific location. This section would also authorize the sum 
total of projects across various locations, each project of 
which is less than $3.0 million. This section would also 
preclude the ability to set-aside operation and maintenance 
facilities restoration and modernization funds for the 
exclusive purpose of funding energy projects. It would require 
installation energy projects to compete in the normal process 
of determining installation requirements.

    Section 2403--Authorization of Appropriations, Defense Agencies

    This section would authorize appropriations for defense 
agencies' military construction at the levels identified in 
section 4601 of division D of this Act.

  Section 2404--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal 
                           Year 2012 Project

    This section would modify the authority provided by section 
2401 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2012 (division B of Public Law 112-81), as amended, to 
authorize the Secretary of Defense to make certain 
modifications to the scope of a previously authorized 
construction project. This section was included in the 
President's request.

 Section 2405--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 2012 
                                Projects

    This section would extend the authorizations listed, 
originally authorized by section 2401 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (division B 
of Public Law 112-81), until October 1, 2016, or the date of 
the enactment of an act authorizing funds for military 
construction for fiscal year 2017, whichever is later. This 
section was included in the President's request.

 Section 2406--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 2013 
                                Projects

    This section would extend the authorizations listed, 
originally authorized by section 2401 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (division B 
of Public Law 112-239), until October 1, 2016, or the date of 
the enactment of an act authorizing funds for military 
construction for fiscal year 2017, whichever is later. This 
section was included in the President's request.

  Section 2407--Modification and Extension of Authority to Carry Out 
                    Certain Fiscal Year 2014 Project

    This section would modify the authority provided by section 
2401 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2014 (division B of Public Law 113-66), to authorize the 
Secretary of Defense to make certain modifications to the scope 
of a previously authorized construction project. This section 
would also extend the authorization authority of the project 
through October 1, 2018, or the date of enactment of an Act 
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
2019. This section was included in the President's request.

   TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT 
                                PROGRAM

                                SUMMARY

    The budget request contained $120,000,000 for the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program (NSIP) 
for fiscal year 2016. The committee recommends authorization of 
$150,000,000 for NSIP for fiscal year 2016.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


    Section 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land Acquisition 
                                Projects

    This section 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 Act 
and the amount collected from the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization as a result of construction previously financed by 
the United States.

          Section 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO

    This section would authorize appropriations for the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program at the 
levels identified in section 4601 of division D of this Act.

            TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES

                                SUMMARY

    The budget request contained $517,269,000 for military 
construction of National Guard and Reserve facilities for 
fiscal year 2016. The committee recommends authorization of 
$478,169,000 for military construction for fiscal year 2016.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                   Explanation of Funding Adjustments

    The committee recommends the decrease of funding for 
several projects requested by the Department that were 
previously authorizations in the Carl Levin and Howard P. 
``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291). These decreases include:
    (1) $10.8 million for Nation Guard Vehicle Maintenance Shop 
at Dagsboro, Delaware. The committee continues to support this 
valid authorization from fiscal year 2015, however, the 
committee encourages the Department of the Army to use 
available unobligated balances for this requirement. As such, 
the committee recommends no funds, a decrease of $10.8 million, 
for this project.
    (2) $19.0 million for Enlisted Barracks and Transit 
Training at the Yakima Training Center, Washington. The 
committee continues to support this valid authorization from 
fiscal year 2015, however, the committee encourages the 
Department of the Army to use available unobligated balances 
for this requirement. As such, the committee recommends no 
funds, a decrease of $19.0 million, for this project.
    (3) $9.3 million for an Army Reserve Center and Land at 
Starkville, Mississippi. The committee continues to support 
this valid authorization from fiscal year 2015, however, the 
committee encourages the Department of the Army to use 
available unobligated balances for this requirement. As such, 
the committee recommends no funds, a decrease of $9.3 million, 
for this project.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


 Subtitle A--Project Authorizations and Authorization of Appropriations


  Section 2601--Authorized Army National Guard Construction and Land 
                          Acquisition Projects

    This section would contain the list of authorized Army 
National Guard construction projects for fiscal year 2016. The 
authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis. The state list contained in this Act is 
intended to be the binding list of the specific projects 
authorized at each location.

Section 2602--Authorized Army Reserve Construction and Land Acquisition 
                                Projects

    This section would contain the list of authorized Army 
Reserve construction projects for fiscal year 2016. The 
authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis. The state list contained in this Act is 
intended to be the binding list of the specific projects 
authorized at each location.

    Section 2603--Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve 
               Construction and Land Acquisition Projects

    This section would contain the list of authorized Navy 
Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve construction projects for 
fiscal year 2016. The authorized amounts are listed on an 
installation-by-installation basis. The state list contained in 
this Act is intended to be the binding list of the specific 
projects authorized at each location.

   Section 2604--Authorized Air National Guard Construction and Land 
                          Acquisition Projects

    This section would contain the list of authorized Air 
National Guard construction projects for fiscal year 2016. The 
authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis. The state list contained in this Act is 
intended to be the binding list of the specific projects 
authorized at each location.

   Section 2605--Authorized Air Force Reserve Construction and Land 
                          Acquisition Projects

    This section would contain the list of authorized Air Force 
Reserve construction projects for fiscal year 2016. The 
authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis. The state list contained in this Act is 
intended to be the binding list of the specific projects 
authorized at each location.

   Section 2606--Authorization of Appropriations, National Guard and 
                                Reserve

    This section would authorize appropriations for the 
National Guard and Reserve military construction at the levels 
identified in section 4601 of division D of this Act.

                       Subtitle B--Other Matters


  Section 2611--Modification and Extension of Authority to Carry Out 
                    Certain Fiscal Year 2013 Project

    This section would modify the authority provided by section 
2602 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2013 (division B of Public Law 112-239) to authorize the 
Secretary of the Army to make certain modifications to the 
scope of a previously authorized construction project. This 
section would also extend the authorization listed until 
October 1, 2016, or the date of the enactment of an act 
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
2017, whichever is later. This section was included in the 
President's request.

 Section 2612--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 2012 
                                Projects

    This section would extend the authorizations listed, 
originally provided by section 2602 the Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (division B of Public 
Law 112-81) until October 1, 2016, or the date of the enactment 
of an act authorizing funds for military construction for 
fiscal year 2017, whichever is later. This section was included 
in the President's request.

 Section 2613--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 2013 
                                Projects

    This section would extend the authorizations listed, 
originally provided by sections 2601, 2602, and 2603 of the 
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 
(division B of Public Law 112-239) until October 1, 2016, or 
the date of the enactment of an act authorizing funds for 
military construction for fiscal year 2017, whichever is later. 
This section was included in the President's request.

          TITLE XXVII--BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES

                                SUMMARY

    The budget request contained $251,334,000 for activities 
related to Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) activities. The 
committee recommends authorization of $251,334,000 for BRAC 
activities.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


Section 2701--Authorization of Appropriations for Base Realignment and 
 Closure Activities Funded through Department of Defense Base Closure 
                                Account

    This section would authorize appropriations for ongoing 
activities that are required to implement the Base Realignment 
and Closure activities authorized by the Defense Base Closure 
and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 
101-510), at the levels identified in section 4601 of division 
D of this Act.

Section 2702--Prohibition on Conducting Additional Base Realignment and 
                          Closure (BRAC) Round

    This section would state that nothing in this Act shall be 
construed to authorize an additional Base Realignment and 
Closure (BRAC) round, affirming congressional intent to reject 
the budget request to authorize another BRAC round in 2017.

         TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PROVISIONS

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


 Collaboration on Electromagnetic Pulse Threats to the Electrical Grid

    The committee remains concerned with the Nation's 
preparedness to withstand, mitigate, and respond to the effects 
of naturally occurring or manmade electromagnetic pulse (EMP) 
events. The committee notes that the Department of Defense 
maintains military standards for the protection of critical 
military infrastructure to enhance EMP preparedness and 
survivability of key national security systems and 
capabilities. However, the Department of Defense relies heavily 
on civilian utility providers to meet installation energy 
requirements. The committee notes that Department of Defense 
missions and systems may be adversely impacted by civilian 
power grid failures due to natural or manmade threats, 
including cyber threats and EMP events. Given the Department of 
Defense expertise on EMP issues and reliance on civilian 
electrical utilities, the committee encourages the Department 
to collaborate with and, as appropriate, share information with 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the North American 
Electric Reliability Corporation, and civilian utility 
commissions and utility providers, with the intent of enhancing 
protection of the electrical grid from natural or manmade EMP 
events.

           Conveyance of Water and Wastewater Systems on Guam

    The committee notes that section 2822 of the Ike Skelton 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public 
Law 111-383) authorized the Secretary of Defense to convey the 
Navy's water and wastewater treatment utility systems on Guam, 
including the Fena Reservoir, to the Guam Waterworks Authority. 
The committee is aware that the Navy, through Navy-owned and 
operated water and wastewater infrastructure, continues to 
provide water and wastewater services to several villages in 
southern Guam. Further, it is noted that Navy water rates 
increased from $5.41 to $7.59 per 1,000 gallons in October 
2014. The committee is aware of significant concerns that have 
been raised about these price increases by local leaders, 
stakeholders, and rate payers. Further, the committee notes 
that recent press reports indicate that the Naval Facilities 
Engineering Command may increase water rates again in fiscal 
year 2016.
    The committee notes that the Secretary of Defense, working 
through the Secretary of the Navy, has not utilized the 
authority provided to them to convey the water and wastewater 
system to the Guam Waterworks Authority. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide a report 
to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than October 
1, 2015, on the feasibility, cost effectiveness, and impact of 
integrating the Navy and Guam Waterworks Authority utility 
systems. The report should also indicate whether the Navy 
intends to utilize its authority to convey the water and 
wastewater utility systems, provide a timeline for the 
conveyance if the Navy intends to utilize its authority, and 
cover the steps being taken to provide the Guam Waterworks 
Authority with third party assistance to bring its operations 
of the system to mutually agreed upon standards.

              Defense Laboratory Enterprise Infrastructure

    The committee recognizes the important role that the 
Defense Laboratory Enterprise plays, ensuring the United States 
maintains technological superiority, responding to the needs of 
the Department of Defense, and accelerating delivery of 
technical capabilities to the warfighter. To ensure the Defense 
Laboratory Enterprise is able to continue its mission, the 
committee believes it is important that the military 
departments make appropriate investments to sustain and 
recapitalize the infrastructure supporting the Defense 
Laboratory Enterprise. The committee notes that several 
critical technologies, including hypersonic weapons, directed 
energy, unmanned aerial systems and electromagnetic railgun, 
will potentially transition from development into production in 
the coming years. However, the budget request for fiscal year 
2016 and the current Future Years Defense Program do not 
include military construction projects in support of the 
Defense Laboratory Enterprise.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, 
in coordination with the Secretaries of the military 
departments, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on 
Armed Services by March 15, 2016, on the infrastructure 
supporting the Defense Laboratory Enterprise. At minimum, the 
briefing should address the current condition and capacity of 
existing infrastructure supporting defense laboratories, 
infrastructure-related investments made to defense laboratory 
infrastructure since fiscal year 2011, and the required 
infrastructure investments in laboratories, offices, and 
support facilities necessary in the coming years to synchronize 
Defense Laboratory capacity with the capability to transition 
emerging technologies into programs of record.

         F-35 Stationing, Basing, and Laydown Selection Process

    The committee believes that the military departments' 
selection process for stationing, basing, and laydown decisions 
for units and missions should remain transparent, repeatable, 
and defendable in nature. While the committee recognizes that 
the military departments each have their own unique 
requirements that may require variations in their stationing, 
basing, and laydown decisions, the committee believes that 
engagement with the congressional defense committees at 
multiple points throughout each of the military services' 
stationing, basing, and laydown processes is critical. The 
committee notes that congressional engagements prior to initial 
screening criteria, upon determining candidate locations, upon 
determining specific site survey criteria, upon determining 
preferred and reasonable alternatives, and upon making a final 
decision have been the most effective in keeping the process 
transparent, repeatable, and defendable. With respect to the 
criteria used, the committee believes that the military 
departments should assess the ability of a military 
installation and its associated or adjacent training areas to 
support the unit or mission, the capacity of a military 
installation to accommodate the unit or mission, the costs 
associated with the stationing, basing, or laydown action, and 
encroachment and environmental considerations.
    Specifically, for future F-35 basing decisions, the 
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force and the 
Secretary of the Navy to provide a briefing to the House 
Committee on Armed Services before the Secretary concerned 
announces the initial screening and site survey criteria for 
the next aviation basing or stationing action, or by December 
1, 2015, whichever date is earlier. The briefing should address 
each military services' existing process for station, basing, 
and laydown decisions for F-35s, outlining existing criteria 
with an explanation of the calculus involved for each criteria. 
In addition, the briefing should detail when and how existing 
military service criteria consider actual routings and 
altitudes traveled to reach the training areas, the types or 
spectrum of training activities the range or ranges concerned 
can support, annual operating costs of transiting to and from 
the training areas, and how weather at both the basing location 
and the training areas are considered in support of mission 
requirements. The briefing should also address how each 
military service currently factors in installations that 
control training areas versus installations that share training 
areas controlled by other users, whether Air Traffic Control 
Assigned Airspace is factored into available airspace 
calculations, and if proximity to joint partners for training 
requirements is evaluated.

     Facilities Sustainment and Recapitalization Policy and Funding

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense manages 
and operates more than 562,000 facilities, which the Department 
needs to sustain and recapitalize to keep them in the condition 
and configuration to support the Department's missions. The 
committee also notes that the Department has not fully funded 
sustainment to meet its estimated needs, which can lead to 
deterioration of the facility, limited use and performance of 
the facility, and can impact mission and readiness of the 
installation. Further, the committee notes that deferred 
maintenance and repair of facilities leads to a need for more 
recapitalization funding in the future to restore and replace 
facilities that become deteriorated and outdated faster than 
expected.
    On March 3, 2015, the Acting Assistant Secretary Of Defense 
for Energy, Installations, and Environment testified before the 
Subcommittee on Readiness that the military departments are 
accepting risk in not sustaining, restoring, and modernizing 
facilities. In an effort to better track and limit risk, in 
fiscal years 2013-14, the Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense 
for Energy, Installations, and Environment issued two memoranda 
establishing a sustainment and recapitalization policy, 
directing the military components to complete certain actions, 
such as funding sustainment to at least 90 percent of the 
Facility Sustainment Model estimate, standardizing gathering of 
facility condition data, and developing mitigation plans for 
facilities that are in failing condition to help improve the 
condition of the facilities in coming years.
    As such, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to review the Department of Defense's plans 
and actions and to provide a report to the congressional 
defense committees by March 14, 2016, that addresses the state 
of the Department's facility sustainment and recapitalization 
programs. At a minimum, the report should address the 
following:
    (1) To what extent has the Department of Defense made 
progress in meeting its policy goals for sustainment and 
recapitalization of its facilities as outlined in the two 
Department memoranda?
    (2) What is known about the condition of facilities and the 
trend in conditions since fiscal year 2011?
    (3) To what extent have the military departments addressed 
deferred facility sustainment needs and what is known about the 
impact of deferred sustainment on facility condition and 
mission readiness?
    (4) What is known about the effect of facilities 
sustainment and recapitalization policy and funding since 
fiscal year 2011 on the quality of life of personnel and 
readiness of the installation?

      Impact of Wind Energy Developments on Military Installations

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense has 
negotiated mitigation efforts with proposed wind energy 
developments in proximity to military installations, training 
ranges, and low-level training routes. The committee is aware 
that some of these mitigations were negotiated prior to the 
completion of scientific studies to determine the effects of 
the wind energy structures and rotating blades on military 
aircraft's main and terrain-following radars. Without the 
results of these studies, the committee is concerned that the 
Department of Defense may not have the information necessary to 
determine the actual impact of mitigation efforts or the extent 
of risk to military missions.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, 
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees not 
later than October 1, 2015, on the science, standards, 
assumptions, and criteria by which the Department assesses the 
risks to military missions posed by wind energy developments in 
proximity to military installations or training ranges. The 
report shall also include the proposed parameters and distances 
from military training routes and ranges that are considered an 
acceptable risk, and a review of the success of mitigation 
measures included in past agreements with wind energy 
developments, including the cost of mitigation measures. 
Finally, the report shall include an analysis of feedback from 
local military installation commanders of the impact or 
effectiveness of proposed mitigation measures.

             Improvement of Design-Build Selection Process

    The committee continues to remain interested in the 
Department of Defense's use and implementation of the two-phase 
design-build selection procedures. The committee notes that 
Section 2305a, title 10, United States Code, was modified in 
the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015, limiting the number of 
offerors specified in a solicitation to five for contract 
values that exceed $4,000,000, but not requiring the use of a 
two-phase selection procedures for these procurements. The 
committee continues to be concerned about how these changes 
have affected the industry and the Department's ability to 
award construction projects.
    As such, the committee requests the Secretary of Defense to 
provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by 
February 1, 2016, that addresses how the Department has 
implemented the modifications to the law enacted last year, any 
feedback the Department has received from industry, and any 
challenges to the implementation of the statue. Further, the 
briefing should include the list of instances in which the 
agency awarded a design-build contract pursuant to this section 
that had more than five finalists for phase-two request for 
proposals during fiscal year 2015, and the list of design-build 
requests for proposals that used a one-step process.

                  Intergovernmental Support Agreements

    The committee notes that section 331 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-
239) authorized the Department of Defense to enter into 
intergovernmental support agreements with State or local 
governments for the procurement of installation support 
services. Section 351 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' 
McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 
(Public Law 113-291) provided additional clarification to the 
authorities for military installations to enter into 
intergovernmental support agreements with State or local 
governments. The committee supports the use of 
intergovernmental support agreements between the Department of 
Defense and State and local governments, and believes that such 
agreements provide an opportunity to streamline costs, realize 
efficiencies, and enhance the quality of services to the 
Department of Defense. The committee notes that the authority 
to enter into intergovernmental support agreements is broad and 
encourages the Department of Defense to leverage this authority 
in a manner that provides cost savings and improved services in 
support of Department of Defense installations, military 
personnel, and their families.

                              Joint Basing

    The committee notes that in 2005, the Department of Defense 
recommended to the Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) 
Commission that 26 installations be combined into 12 joint 
bases to generate efficiencies and savings. This recommendation 
was implemented, and the committee commends the Department and 
military departments on their implementation of joint basing. 
The BRAC Commission estimated that joint basing would result in 
$183.0 million in annual recurring savings. The committee notes 
that, according to the Department's Report to Congress on the 
Joint Basing Initiative, joint bases saved $255.0 million in 
fiscal year 2012 and $830.0 million in fiscal year 2013, 
surpassing both the one-time implementation cost of $155.0 
million and the estimated savings predicted by the BRAC 
Commission. The committee believes there is a strong fiscal and 
operational incentive to joint basing, evident in the 
efficiencies that have occurred to date. Therefore, the 
committee encourages the Department to continue looking for 
opportunities to streamline operations at joint bases and 
continue its efforts to achieve additional efficiencies through 
joint basing.

                  Lincoln Laboratory Recapitalization

    The committee recognizes the role that Lincoln Laboratory 
plays in conducting research and developing technologies that 
address critical national security challenges. In the committee 
report (H. Rept. 113-446) accompanying the Howard P. ``Buck'' 
McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015, 
the committee noted its concern about the need to recapitalize 
the infrastructure supporting Lincoln Laboratory's facilities 
at Hanscom Air Force Base, Massachusetts. The committee is 
aware that the Department of Defense is conducting an analysis 
of alternatives to determine the most appropriate and fiscally 
responsible approach to recapitalize the infrastructure 
supporting Lincoln Laboratory. Therefore, the committee directs 
the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the House 
Committee on Armed Services not later than September 1, 2015, 
to review the results of the analysis of alternatives and the 
Department's plan for ensuring that Lincoln Laboratory's 
facilities are able to appropriately support research and 
development that is vital to the security of the United States.

  Major Range and Test Facility Base Military Construction Assessment

    The Major Range and Test Facility Base (MRTFB) is a set of 
test installations, facilities, and ranges which are regarded 
as ``national assets.'' This designated core set of Department 
of Defense Test and Evaluation (T&E) infrastructure and 
associated workforce is a critical capability to be preserved 
in order to conduct necessary T&E analyses to support the 
Department's acquisition process. The MRTFB exists primarily to 
provide T&E information for Department of Defense decision 
makers and to support T&E needs of Department of Defense 
research and weapon system development programs. The committee 
recognizes that the MRTFB must remain sized, operated, and 
maintained to preserve core, governmental T&E capabilities.
    The committee is aware that the Test Resource Management 
Center (TRMC), a field activity within the Department of 
Defense, has the lead responsibility for oversight of the 
Department's facilities, ranges, and all other physical assets 
that are used to support Department of Defense T&E. TRMC 
exercises that responsibility in a number of ways, including 
the biennial strategic plan for Department T&E Resources, as 
well as annual budget certification to ensure each military 
department and Department of Defense agency with responsibility 
for T&E is proposing adequate funding within its annual budget 
submission. In the Strategic Plan for Department of Defense T&E 
Resources from March 2013, the report noted, ``Due to age and 
outmoded technology, many test facilities are increasingly 
difficult to sustain and/or maintain. Obsolescence and 
deterioration contribute significantly to increased levels of 
maintenance, reductions in reliability, and an overall increase 
in operating costs. Services are under pressure to keep 
existing ground test facilities viable and relevant to meet 
immediate and forecasted needs. Across all services, there has 
been a downward trend in T&E Military Construction (MILCON) 
appropriations to address ongoing maintenance, sustainment, and 
modernization needs of our T&E facilities. Further analysis is 
required (e.g., recapitalization rate) to provide a 
comprehensive assessment of MRTFB-only MILCON needs and 
investments.''
    Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the Test 
Resource Management Center to submit a report to the 
congressional defense committees by March 1, 2016, on the 
results of the comprehensive assessment of MRTFB-only military 
construction needs and investments called for by the March 2013 
strategic plan. The assessment should include an estimated cost 
to replace or bring to code deficient structures, as well as a 
plan for ensuring sufficient capacity for all Department of 
Defense MRTFB facilities to support current and projected 
future operations. Additionally, the committee encourages TRMC 
to use the results from this assessment to inform future budget 
certifications from the military departments and Department of 
Defense agencies.
    The committee further directs the Director of the Test 
Resource Management Center to provide a briefing to the House 
Committee on Armed Services by January 15, 2016, on the 
Director's preliminary findings.

    Non-Federally Connected Civilian Children Residing in Military 
                           Privatized Housing

    The committee notes its continued support for the Military 
Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI), which has worked to 
improve military family housing by allowing private developers 
to improve, maintain and operate housing communities. In the 
two decades since it was enacted, private ventures created 
under the program have improved quality of life for those who 
serve. Recent testimony to the committee notes that the 
department completed its MHPI award phase in fiscal year 2013 
with award of the final three Air Force MHPI projects, bringing 
the total privatized inventory to about 205,000 housing units.
    The committee is aware that under the program, priority for 
housing goes first to military personnel, federal employees, 
and retirees. However, if occupancy rates drop below certain 
levels for a period of time, housing can be made available to 
the general public. While the committee believes that this is 
an important part of ensuring the financial viability of these 
public-private ventures, it is concerned that this approach 
could also pose unanticipated challenges to the communities 
that support them.
    To this end, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services 
by March 1, 2016 with an analysis that includes:
    (1) Site-by-site census of non-federally connected civilian 
children living in housing under the Military Housing 
Privatization Initiative (MHPI) annually between FY2011 and 
FY2015;
    (2) An evaluation of projected force structure trends over 
the next decade that may influence the levels of non-federally 
connected civilian children; and
    (3) A discussion of any impacts to civilian communities as 
a result of any changes in the levels of non-federally 
connected civilian children residing in such housing, and 
recommendations to mitigate such impacts.

         Public Schools on Department of Defense Installations

    The committee is aware that the Department of Defense, 
acting through the Office of Economic Adjustment (OEA), has 
provided grants to local educational agencies to construct, 
renovate, repair, or expand elementary and secondary public 
schools on military installations. In awarding grants to local 
educational agencies, OEA has given priority consideration to 
those military installations with schools having the most 
serious capacity and facility condition deficiencies, as 
determined by the Department of Defense in a July 2011 priority 
list.
    The committee recognizes the efforts of the Department of 
Defense to improve the condition and capacity deficiencies of 
elementary and secondary public schools on military 
installations in support of military dependents. Therefore, the 
committee encourages the the Department of Defense to continue 
to take appropriate steps to address condition and capacity 
deficiencies at elementary and secondary public schools on 
military installations. Furthermore, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to provide an updated report to the 
congressional defense committees by March 14, 2016, on the 
condition and capacity of schools in bands 7, 8, and 9 of the 
July 2011 Priority List.

                         Utility Privatization

    The committee notes that the military departments have 
leveraged existing authorities to privatize the utility systems 
providing electricity, water, wastewater, and natural gas to 
military installations. Through utilities privatization, 
military installations have been able to achieve greater 
efficiencies and reduce operating costs while recapitalizing 
aging utilities infrastructure with modern, reliable systems. 
In addition, the committee notes that utilities privatization 
can also enhance support to military missions. Therefore, the 
committee encourages the military departments to continue to 
pursue utility privatization initiatives when they are 
supported by a business case analysis and are in the best 
interest of the government in terms of efficiency, operating 
costs, and mission assurance.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


 Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family Housing 
                                Changes


  Section 2801--Revision of Congressional Notification Thresholds for 
      Reserve Facility Expenditures and Contributions to Reflect 
Congressional Notification Thresholds for Minor Construction and Repair 
                                Projects

    This section would align Reserve Component minor 
construction and repair thresholds with the threshold specified 
in chapter 169 of title 10, United States Code.

 Section 2802--Authority for Acceptance and Use of Contributions from 
  Kuwait for Construction, Maintenance, and Repair Projects Mutually 
   Beneficial to the Department of Defense and Kuwait Military Forces

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense, 
after consultation with the Secretary of State, to accept 
contributions from the Government of the State of Kuwait in 
support of construction, maintenance, and repair projects 
within Kuwait that are mutually beneficial to the Department of 
Defense and the Kuwait military forces. The section would also 
limit the maximum amount the Secretary of Defense may obligate 
to $50.0 million annually, require a congressional notification 
with 21-day wait period, 14-day period if notification is 
provided in electronic medium, for projects exceeding the 
thresholds prescribed by section 2805, title 10, United States 
Code, and expire on September 30, 2020.

      Section 2803--Defense Laboratory Modernization Pilot Program

    The section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
carry out a pilot program, using amounts authorized to be 
appropriated to the Department of Defense for Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, such military construction 
projects for any Department of Defense Science and Technology 
Reinvention Laboratory or Department of Defense federally 
funded research and development center as are authorized in the 
Military Construction Authorization Act. This section would 
also limit the maximum amount that may be obligated in any 
fiscal year under this authority at $150.0 million and would 
expire on October 1, 2020.

        Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration


 Section 2811--Enhancement of Authority to Accept Conditional Gifts of 
         Real Property on Behalf of Military Service Academies

    This section would provide consistency across the military 
service academies on the acceptance of a gift of real property, 
if the gift of such real property is conditioned upon the 
property bearing a specified name. This section would authorize 
the military service academies to accept such a gift if the 
acceptance and naming would not reflect unfavorably on the 
United States, and the real property has not otherwise been 
named by an act of Congress. This section would also require 
the Secretaries of the military departments to issue uniform 
regulations governing circumstances under which gifts 
conditioned on naming rights may be accepted.

Section 2812--Consultation Requirement in Connection with Department of 
                    Defense Major Land Acquisitions

    This section would modify section 2664(a) of title 10, 
United States Code, to require consultation by the Secretary 
concerned with the chief executive officer of the State, 
district, or territory as to options for completing the real 
property acquisition.
    The committee notes that the Secretary concerned is already 
required to obtain a specific military construction 
authorization in accordance with section 2802 of title 10, 
United States Code, and comply with National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321) before any major land 
acquisition can be implemented.

Section 2813--Additional Master Plan Reporting Requirements Related to 
Main Operating Bases, Forward Operating Sites, and Cooperative Security 
Locations of Central Command and Africa Command Areas of Responsibility

    This section would amend section 2687a(a) of title 10, 
United States Code, by adding a requirement for the Secretary 
of Defense to include with the existing overseas basing report 
a strategic summary for each main operating base, forward 
operating site, or cooperative security location within the 
U.S. Central Command and U.S. Africa Command area of 
responsibility. This section would sunset in fiscal year 2020.

  Section 2814--Force-Structure Plan and Infrastructure Inventory and 
 Assessment of Infrastructure Necessary to Support the Force Structure

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a report, as part of the budget justification documents 
accompanying the President's budget request for fiscal year 
2017, that details a 20-year force structure plan for each of 
the military services and a comprehensive inventory of 
worldwide infrastructure. The report would also compare these 
two items to determine the infrastructure necessary to support 
the force structure, discuss the categories of excess 
infrastructure and infrastructure capacity, and assess the 
value of retaining certain excess infrastructure to accommodate 
contingency, mobilization, or surge requirements. In addition, 
this section would require the Comptroller General of the 
United States to prepare an evaluation of such force-structure 
plans and infrastructure inventory not later than 60 days after 
the date on which the plans and inventory are submitted to 
Congress. The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense and 
the Comptroller General to also take into consideration, as 
appropriate, the recommendations regarding force structure and 
force sizing provided by the July 31, 2014, assessment of the 
2014 Quadrennial Defense Review by the National Defense Panel.

  Subtitle C--Provisions Related to Asia-Pacific Military Realignment


 Section 2821--Restriction on Development of Public Infrastructure in 
  Connection with Realignment of Marine Corps Forces in Asia-Pacific 
                                 Region

    This section would amend restrictions placed on the 
development of civilian infrastructure on Guam to support the 
realignment of Marine Corps Forces in the Asia-Pacific region 
to allow the use of funds for infrastructure projects that are 
identified in the report of the Economic Adjustment Committee 
required by section 2831(d) of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66). 
This section would also permit the use of funding for the 
planning and design of such projects.

Section 2822--Annual Report on Government of Japan Contributions toward 
       Realignment of Marine Corps Forces in Asia-Pacific Region

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit an annual report to the congressional defense committees 
for each of fiscal years 2017-26 that addresses the total 
amount contributed from the Government of Japan to the Support 
for United States Relocation to Guam Account during the most 
recent year, as well as the anticipated contributions to be 
made during the current and next Japanese fiscal years. The 
report would also cover the infrastructure projects carried out 
on Guam or the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands in 
the previous fiscal year using funds from the Support for 
United States Relocation to Guam Account, as well as the 
projects anticipated to be carried out during the next fiscal 
year. This section would also repeal a reporting requirement 
from the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417).

                      Subtitle D--Land Conveyances


Section 2831--Land Exchange Authority, Mare Island Army Reserve Center, 
                          Vallejo, California

    This section would authorize a land exchange involving a 
parcel of real property under the jurisdiction of the Secretary 
of the Army on the site of the former Mare Island Naval 
Shipyard, Vallejo, California, in the event that a current real 
property exchange process is unsuccessful.

  Section 2832--Land Exchange, Navy Outlying Landing Field, Naval Air 
                    Station, Whiting Field, Florida

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to 
convey a parcel of real property, including any improvements 
thereon, containing Navy Outlying Landing Field Site 8 in 
Escambia County, Florida, to Escambia County. In exchange, this 
section would require Escambia County to convey to the 
Secretary of the Navy a parcel of property that is suitable for 
use as a Navy outlying landing field to replace Navy Outlying 
Landing Field Site 8.

Section 2833--Release of Property Interests Retained in Connection with 
        Land Conveyance, Fort Bliss Military Reservation, Texas

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
release the rights and the reversionary interests reserved by 
the United States for a parcel of land in El Paso, Texas, to 
authorize the State of Texas to sell a portion of the property 
and use all proceeds from the sale to fund improvements or 
repairs for the National Guard facilities on the remainder of 
the property.

                 Subtitle E--Military Land Withdrawals


  Section 2841--Withdrawal and Reservation of Public Land, Naval Air 
                 Weapons Station China Lake, California

    This section would provide for the withdrawal and 
reservation of additional public land in San Bernardino County, 
California, to support operations at Naval Air Weapons Station 
China Lake, California.

   Section 2842--Bureau of Land Management Withdrawn Military Lands 
                         Efficiency and Savings

    This section would extend the public lands withdrawn for 
military purposes listed in the Military Lands Withdrawal Act 
of 1999 (title 30 of Public Law 106-65) until the Secretary of 
the military department determines a military purpose does not 
exist, or the Secretary of Interior permanently transfers the 
administrative jurisdiction to the Secretary of the military 
department concerned.

         Subtitle F--Military Memorials, Monuments, and Museums


 Section 2851--Renaming Site of the Dayton Aviation Heritage National 
                         Historical Park, Ohio

    This section would modify the name of the John W. Berry, 
Sr. Wright Brothers Aviation Center, Dayton, Ohio, to the John 
W. Berry, Sr. Wright Brothers National Museum, Dayton, Ohio.

Section 2852--Extension of Authority for Establishment of Commemorative 
           Work in Honor of Brigadier General Francis Marion

    This section would extend the authority to establish a 
commemorative work on Federal land in the District of Columbia 
and its environs to honor Brigadier General Francis Marion and 
his service, originally provided by section 331 of the 
Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-
229), through May 8, 2018.

   Section 2853--Amendments to the National Historic Preservation Act

    This section would prohibit the designation of Federal 
property as a National Historic Landmark or for nomination to 
the World Heritage List if the head of the agency managing the 
Federal property objects to such inclusion or designation for 
reasons of national security. This section would also authorize 
the expedited removal of Federal property listed on the 
National Register of Historic Places if the managing agency of 
that Federal property submits a request to the Secretary of 
Interior for such removal for reasons of national security.

                       Subtitle G--Other Matters


Section 2861--Modification of Department of Defense Guidance on Use of 
                       Airfield Pavement Markings

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
modify the Unified Facilities Guide Specifications for pavement 
markings, an Air Force engineering technical letter, and any 
other Department of Defense guidance on airfield pavement 
markings as necessary to permit the use of Type III category of 
retro-reflective beads. In addition, the Secretary shall 
develop appropriate policy to ensure that determination of the 
category of retro-reflective beads used on airfields is 
determined on an installation-by-installation basis based on 
local conditions and the life-cycle maintenance costs of the 
pavement markings.

      Section 2862--Protection and Recovery of Greater Sage Grouse

    This section would delay any finding by the Secretary of 
the Interior with respect to the Greater Sage Grouse under 
clause (i), (ii), or (iii) of section 4(b)(3)(B) of the 
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(B)) 
through September 30, 2025. In an effort to foster greater 
coordination between the States and the Federal Government 
regarding management plans for the Greater Sage Grouse, this 
section would prohibit the Secretary of the Interior and the 
Secretary of Agriculture from amending any Federal resource 
management plan applicable to Federal lands in a State in which 
the Governor of the State has notified the Secretaries 
concerned that the State has a State management plan in place. 
Lastly, this section would also require the Secretary of the 
Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to jointly submit an 
annual report to the Committee on Natural Resources of the 
House of Representatives on the effectiveness of the systems to 
monitor the status of Greater Sage Grouse on Federal lands 
under their jurisdiction through 2021.

   TITLE XXIX--OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

                                SUMMARY

    The budget request did not contain a request for Overseas 
Contingency Operations military construction for fiscal year 
2016. The committee recommends authorization of $532,000,000 
for military construction for fiscal year 2016.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


Section 2901--Authorized Army Construction and Land Acquisition Project

    This section would contain the list of a certain authorized 
Army construction project for fiscal year 2016. This project 
represents a binding list of the specific projects authorized 
at this location.

    Section 2902--Authorized Navy Construction and Land Acquisition 
                                Projects

    This section would contain the list of certain authorized 
Navy construction projects for fiscal year 2016. These projects 
represent a binding list of the specific projects authorized at 
these locations.

 Section 2903--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land Acquisition 
                                Projects

    This section would contain the list of certain authorized 
Air Force construction projects for fiscal year 2016. These 
projects represent a binding list of the specific projects 
authorized at these locations.

    Section 2904--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and Land 
                          Acquisition Projects

    This section would contain the list of certain authorized 
Defense-Wide construction projects for fiscal year 2016. These 
projects represent a binding list of the specific projects 
authorized at these locations.

             Section 2905--Authorization of Appropriations

    This section would authorize appropriations for overseas 
contingency operations military construction at the levels 
identified in section 4602 of division D of this Act.

 DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND 
                          OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS

      TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS

                                OVERVIEW

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $18.87 
billion for atomic energy defense activities. The committee 
recommends $18.69 billion, a decrease of $175.3 million to the 
budget request.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                National Nuclear Security Administration


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $12.57 
billion for the programs of the National Nuclear Security 
Administration. The committee recommends $12.77 billion, an 
increase of $204.7 million to the budget request.

                           Weapons Activities


Advanced radiography

    The committee notes the fiscal year 2016 budget request 
justification materials for the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) described a technology gap identified by 
the directors of the national security laboratories and the 
director of the Nevada National Security Site regarding NNSA's 
ability to assess the final stages of a nuclear weapon's 
primary implosion without nuclear explosive testing. The 
committee supports NNSA's initiative to fill this gap through 
the development of enhanced radiography for integrated 
subcritical plutonium experiments at NNSS and therefore reduce 
risks in scientific understanding necessary to design and 
certify future stockpile life extension programs.
    However, the committee notes that NNSA has requested 
initial funding for this project but has not yet submitted a 
project data sheet for it, which would provide increased 
transparency on the project's multi-year cost and schedule. The 
committee understands that certain aspects of this project may 
require significant cutting-edge science and substantial 
research and development before implementation, but other, 
largely separate, portions of the project are focused on more 
standardized equipment and infrastructure improvements. The 
committee believes these latter aspects of this project, at 
least, should be accelerated and managed under a full or 
streamlined capital asset acquisition process under Department 
of Energy (DOE) Order 413.3B, ``Program and Project Management 
for the Acquisition of Capital Assets.'' The committee believes 
that portions of the project requiring significant further 
technology maturation and research and development may, if the 
Administrator determines it appropriate, continue to be 
developed under other authorities.
    The committee directs the Administrator for Nuclear 
Security to provide the congressional defense committees, by 
September 1, 2015, a project data sheet in compliance with DOE 
Order 413.3B for part or all of the enhanced radiography 
project to enable transparency and accountability for this 
program. As always, the committee expects NNSA to follow a best 
practices acquisition approach for this project.

B61-12 and W76-1 Life Extension Programs

    The budget request contained $643.3 million for the B61-12 
Life Extension Program (LEP) and $244.0 million for the W76-1 
LEP. The committee continues to believe that the National 
Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA) primary focus must be 
its nuclear weapon stockpile stewardship program. Within that 
broader program the deliverables directly supporting Department 
of Defense requirements must be paramount. Successfully 
delivering LEPs efficiently and on schedule must be NNSA's 
central focus.
    The committee highlights the value of the B61-12 LEP in 
producing a nuclear gravity bomb that will be both a tangible 
and credible extended deterrent to U.S. allies, as well as a 
critical component of the United States' own strategic 
deterrent. The committee also notes the importance of the W76-1 
to the strategic triad. With the sea-based leg of the triad 
expected to soon carry approximately 70 percent of the nation's 
operationally deployed strategic warheads, the W76-1 will be 
the cornerstone of the U.S. nuclear deterrent for decades to 
come.
    The committee notes the significant progress made on both 
of these LEPs in the past year. Information from NNSA and its 
laboratories indicates that the B61-12 LEP continues to meet 
all major milestones on-schedule and on-budget. The B61-12 LEP 
is scheduled to enter Phase 6.4, Production Engineering, in 
2016 and the committee looks forward to this progress. 
Meanwhile, the W76-1 LEP recently completed over 50 percent of 
the planned warhead production. The committee commends the 
progress in both programs and believes sustained success in 
these crucial national security programs will continue to help 
NNSA rebuild trust with the Department of Defense and Congress.
    The committee recommends $643.3 million for the B61-12 LEP 
and $244.0 million for the W76-1 LEP, the full amount of the 
budget request.

Defense nuclear security

    As the Department of Energy and the National Nuclear 
Security Administration (NNSA) continue to implement corrective 
actions resulting from the intrusion at the Y-12 National 
Security Complex in 2012, the committee notes modest 
improvements in certain aspects of the defense nuclear security 
program. For instance, a degree of clarification of roles, 
responsibilities, authority, and accountability for security 
has been undertaken, though the committee believes more should 
be done to formalize and institutionalize these efforts. The 
committee is also encouraged by ongoing efforts to review and 
update certain security policies, including the Department's 
design basis threat.
    As its oversight of these matters continues, the committee 
is concerned about the long list of deferred physical security 
expenditures across the nuclear security enterprise. Recent 
estimates by NNSA show a list of deferred security expenditures 
of over $1.4 billion, which appears to be in addition to the 
$3.6 billion backlog of general deferred maintenance across the 
enterprise. Modernization and recapitalization of the Perimeter 
Intrusion Detection and Assessment Systems (PIDAS) at the Y-12 
National Security Complex and the Pantex Plant account for more 
than half of the $1.4 billion. The committee believes NNSA must 
undertake a comprehensive program to prioritize and manage its 
physical security recapitalization efforts over the next 10 
years. To enable this recapitalization to be both cost 
effective and appropriately designed, NNSA must conduct 
rigorous analysis of policies, technologies, and options to 
ensure it is postured to address current and future threats 
while striving for standardization and cost efficiencies 
wherever possible.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Administrator for 
Nuclear Security to provide a report to the congressional 
defense committees by September 30, 2016, containing a 10-year 
plan to recapitalize the nuclear security enterprise's physical 
security systems. Such risk-based plan should include the 
following: a condition assessment for physical security 
equipment; a prioritized list with costs and schedules for 
recapitalization of individual systems and equipment; an 
analysis of security policies, technologies, and gaps related 
to current and evolving threats; and how standardization and 
cost efficiencies will be sought across the enterprise. The 
committee encourages NNSA to conduct rigorous and comprehensive 
analyses of alternatives for all major components of this 
recapitalization program, particularly the PIDAS modernization 
programs. The committee further directs the Administrator to 
provide an interim briefing to the congressional defense 
committees on the development of this plan by February 15, 
2016.
    To begin this planning and initial recapitalization of the 
NNSA physical security infrastructure, the committee recommends 
$631.9 million, an increase of $12.0 million to the budget 
request, for Defense Nuclear Security, Operations and 
Maintenance.

Deferred maintenance

    Within a proposed Infrastructure and Safety budget 
category, the budget request for the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) contained $227.0 million for Maintenance 
and $257.7 million for Recapitalization. Respectively, these 
programs fund day-to-day preventative or corrective maintenance 
activities and efforts to reduce the large backlog of deferred 
maintenance across the nuclear security enterprise. Combined, 
these programs are critical to arresting the declining state of 
NNSA's infrastructure.
    Budget request justification materials submitted by NNSA 
note that NNSA's deferred maintenance backlog is over $3.6 
billion and growing. The materials highlight that, of NNSA's 
approximately 3,800 facilities, almost 30 percent were built 
during the Manhattan Project era and over 50 percent are more 
than 40 years old. Moreover, 12 percent of NNSA's buildings are 
no longer in use, but must be maintained in a safe state until 
funds can be allocated for demolition and disposition.
    The committee agrees with NNSA that infrastructure risk, if 
left unaddressed, becomes safety risk and mission risk. This 
fact was made vivid in March 2014 and July 2014 when large 
blocks of concrete fell from ceilings in two separate 
facilities at the Y-12 National Security Complex in Tennessee. 
Multiple fire suppression system leaks last year at the Pantex 
Plant and the Device Assembly Facility resulted in shutdowns, 
and broken basic infrastructure resulted in program delays at 
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Y-12, and other sites. 
The committee reiterates its position that the decrepit state 
of the nation's nuclear infrastructure is unacceptable and must 
be expeditiously corrected. The nation cannot expect to attract 
and retain first-class scientists, engineers, and technicians 
to the nuclear security enterprise if several of its facilities 
present safety hazards.
    The committee believes the Administrator for Nuclear 
Security has taken a major and important step in finding 
creative solutions to this problem by pursuing a lease option 
to acquire administrative support capabilities at Pantex. The 
committee encourages the Administrator and the Secretary to 
continue to seek such solutions (when they are fiscally sound) 
and to refine and improve their methodology for understanding, 
calculating, and prioritizing infrastructure projects.
    The committee is encouraged that the Administrator and the 
Secretary have taken steps to stop the growth in the backlog of 
deferred maintenance, but believes more must be done to 
actually decrease the total amount of the backlog. Therefore, 
the committee recommends $407.7 million, an increase of $150.0 
million, for Recapitalization, and $251.0 million, an increase 
of $24.0 million, for Maintenance.

Funding prioritization within Weapons Activities

    The budget request contained $8.85 billion for the Weapons 
Activities of the National Nuclear Security Administration 
(NNSA). These programs support NNSA's central mission of 
ensuring and sustaining the safety, security, reliability, and 
credibility of the U.S. nuclear weapon stockpile.
    Within Weapons Activities, the committee continues to 
believe NNSA must emphasize programs and capabilities that 
directly support NNSA's deliverables to the Department of 
Defense. The committee believes NNSA has taken significant 
steps in this regard within its budget request and recommends 
no adjustment from the budget request level for life extension 
programs.
    As NNSA focuses on its concrete deliverables to the 
military, the committee seeks to ensure NNSA does not neglect 
longer-term requirements and needs. Therefore, the committee 
recommends $203.8 million, an increase of $11.2 million, for 
R&D Certification and Safety, to support an increased rate of 
underground subcritical experiments. The committee also 
recommends $26.9 million, an increase of $2.4 million, for 
Nuclear Survivability, to support an increased level of effort, 
and $51.9 million, an increase of $1.1 million, for Enhanced 
Surety, to support continued development and maturation of 
safety, security, and use-control technologies. Finally, the 
committee recommends $67.3 million, a decrease of $6.0 million, 
for Ignition, and $322.8 million, a decrease of $11.0 million, 
for Facility Operations and Target Production, to redirect 
funds from fusion ignition efforts towards higher priority 
needs.
    Elsewhere in this title, the committee explains other 
recommendations regarding funding priorities within NNSA's 
Weapons Activities. Overall, the committee recommends $9.08 
billion, an increase of $237.7 million, for Weapons Activities.

Funding related to execution of life extension programs

    The committee understands that certain funding within the 
National Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA) budget 
request for Weapons Activities, but not within the life 
extension program (LEP) budget lines themselves, directly 
affect NNSA's ability to successfully execute LEPs. For 
instance, if cut, certain funding within Advanced Simulation 
and Computing or Stockpile Services would have a direct and 
negative impact on the B61-12 LEP. The committee acknowledges 
the difficulty, transparency issues, and possible inefficiency 
in ensuring all such funding resides in the LEP budget lines, 
but encourages the Administrator for Nuclear Security make 
clear in future budget requests what funding within the broader 
Weapons Activities account supports and is considered critical 
to successful execution of LEPs.

Governance and management of the nuclear security enterprise

    The committee thanks the co-chairs and members of the 
Congressional Advisory Panel on the Governance of the Nuclear 
Security Enterprise that was established by section 3166 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public 
Law 112-239). The work of this advisory panel is a valuable 
contribution to the ongoing effort to address longstanding 
governance and management problems at the Department of Energy 
(DOE) and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). 
The advisory panel's final report, ``A New Foundation for the 
Nuclear Enterprise,'' makes a series of recommendations for 
action, many of them aligning with suggestions from previous 
studies and many of them new.
    The committee notes that the advisory panel's final report 
makes several recommendations for legislative action, stating 
that, ``inadequate implementation of the legislation 
establishing NNSA as a separately organized sub-element of DOE 
has resulted in overlapping DOE and NNSA headquarters staffs 
and blurred ownership and accountability for the nuclear 
enterprise missions.'' The committee agrees that the executive 
branch's implementation of the NNSA Act (50 U.S.C. 2401 et 
seq.) has been inadequate, but does not believe this is 
sufficient reason, or that there is sufficient trust at this 
time, for Congress to change key elements of this statute and 
return to an organizational structure within DOE that proved 
deficient in the past. The proposed remedy of fully 
reintegrating NNSA's defense functions back into DOE may merely 
compound the difficult problem of fixing NNSA by requiring a 
fix to larger problems across the much broader Department as a 
whole. Therefore, the committee has decided not to make any 
statutory changes at this time to the NNSA Act or related 
legislation to address the advisory panel's recommendations, 
and believes DOE and NNSA should not take any steps 
inconsistent with current law. However, the committee looks 
forward to rebuilding trust and seeking cooperative solutions 
with the Administrator for Nuclear Security and the Secretary 
of Energy.
    Based on its oversight, the committee believes the 
Administrator and the Secretary have begun taking significant 
initial steps in this regard. More, however, must be done, and 
the effort must be sustained for the long-term and across 
administrations. The advisory panel's final report points to 
cultural, management, and leadership problems as root causes. 
The committee recognizes that leadership from both the 
Secretary of Energy and the Administrator will be essential and 
believes it will take sustained, personal engagement by the 
Administrator and the Secretary to remedy these problems. For 
instance, actions to reduce detailed, transactional oversight 
without reducing oversight of health, safety, and security will 
require major long-term cultural shifts driven by senior 
leaders. Similarly, moving to rebuild trust and partnership 
among Federal officials and the NNSA laboratories and plants 
will require clear direction, requirements, and vision as well 
as strong accountability for implementing concrete and 
measurable changes. Successfully taking action on many other 
recommendations, including adopting proven management and best 
business practices, making fundamental changes to contracting 
approaches and award fees, and establishing very clear roles, 
responsibilities, authorities, and accountability, will require 
the Administrator and the Secretary to guide major shifts away 
from NNSA's and DOE's traditional practices and address NNSA's 
and DOE's challenges.
    In the end, the advisory panel concluded that 
``demonstrated performance is the ultimate measure of success 
and the foundation for credibility and trust.'' The committee 
agrees. The committee expects continued action and focused 
attention from Congress and the administration can provide the 
nation a nuclear security enterprise that is focused on 
achieving its mission effectively and efficiently as well as 
safely and securely.
    Elsewhere in this title, the committee includes a provision 
that would provide NNSA and DOE an implementation framework for 
taking actions to address the recommendations of the advisory 
panel (and other studies) that do not require legislative 
action. The committee looks forward to continued engagement 
with the Administrator and the Secretary on this issue and to 
significant progress in the years ahead.

Plutonium strategy

    The budget request contained $174.7 million for Plutonium 
Sustainment and $155.6 million for the Chemistry and Metallurgy 
Research Replacement Project. Combined, these two budget lines 
provide funding for achieving the nation's plutonium strategy 
to revitalize plutonium pit production capabilities.
    The committee supports the National Nuclear Security 
Administration's (NNSA) plutonium strategy, which aligns with 
the statutory pit production requirements established by 
section 3112 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public 
Law 113-291). The committee believes the three-step approach 
proposed by NNSA, coupled with line item budgeting, will ensure 
transparency while providing NNSA the flexibility to execute 
this important strategy. The committee will continue to closely 
monitor the plutonium strategy, as well as efforts to address 
the concerns that resulted in the plutonium operations safety 
stand-down at Los Alamos National Laboratory, and particularly 
emphasizes the imperative to cease operations in the Chemistry 
and Metallurgy Research building, which is over 60 years old, 
by 2019.
    To support NNSA's plutonium strategy, and ensure NNSA meets 
safety and statutory pit production requirements, the committee 
recommends $183.1 million, an increase of $8.4 million, for 
Plutonium Sustainment, and $155.6 million, the full amount 
requested, for the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research 
Replacement Project.

Primary Assessment Technologies

    The budget request contained $98.5 million for Primary 
Assessment Technologies within the National Nuclear Security 
Administration's (NNSA) Research, Development, Testing, and 
Evaluation Science program.
    Among other activities, Primary Assessment Technologies 
supports capabilities needed for Intelligence Community 
assessments of foreign nuclear weapon activities. The committee 
also understands that NNSA proposes to fund fiscal year 2016 
efforts to carry out section 4509 of the Atomic Energy Defense 
Act (50 U.S.C. 2660) related to design and use of prototypes of 
nuclear weapons for intelligence purposes within Primary 
Assessment Technologies. The committee expects that these 
efforts will be intelligence-driven and tightly linked to 
designs based on intelligence assessments.
    Elsewhere in this title, the committee includes a provision 
to create a nuclear weapon design responsiveness program to 
sustain, enhance, and continually exercise all capabilities 
required to conceptualize, study, design, develop, engineer, 
certify, produce, and deploy nuclear weapons.
    To facilitate all of these efforts, the committee 
recommends $120.1 million, an increase of $21.6 million, for 
Primary Assessment Technologies. Due to the tightly coupled 
nature of these programs, the committee believes this is an 
appropriate location for funding these efforts in fiscal year 
2016. However, as these efforts gain further clarity and grow 
more distinct, the committee urges the Administrator for 
Nuclear Security to consider whether other funding mechanisms 
may be more appropriate.

Stockpile Surveillance and Assessment

    The budget request contained $52.2 million for B61 
Stockpile Systems and $42.2 million for B83 Stockpile Systems. 
This funding provides for, among other things, weapon 
maintenance, surveillance, and assessment activities.
    The budget request proposes significant reductions in 
funding for these activities, amounting to an over 50 percent 
reduction for B61 Stockpile Systems and a 33 percent reduction 
for B83 Stockpile Systems as compared to fiscal year 2015. 
These reductions are based on the administration's proposals to 
retire these weapons in the mid- or late-2020s, when the B61-12 
has been fully produced and is operational. The proposed 
funding reductions allow the National Nuclear Security 
Administration to increase funding for the W88 Alt 370 program 
to support an expanded scope for this effort. While the 
committee supports the expansion of the W88 Alt 370 to include 
a refresh of the weapon's conventional high explosives, the 
committee is concerned about the increased risk that is being 
accepted in surveillance and assessments of the safety and 
reliability of the B61 and B83. The budget justification 
materials provided to the committee highlight that the 
``reduction in surveillance activities increases risk in 
ability to detect and investigate anomalies and increases the 
uncertainty in reliability assessments.''
    To decrease this risk, the committee recommends $73.2 
million, an increase of $21.0 million, for B61 Stockpile 
Systems, and $51.2 million, an increase of $9.0 million, for 
B83 Stockpile Systems.

Uranium for national security purposes

    The committee understands that the Secretary of Energy, the 
Administrator for Nuclear Security, the Secretary of State, and 
the Secretary of Defense are reviewing the available stockpile 
of unencumbered uranium and considering potential options for 
ensuring a long-term supply of enriched uranium is available 
for national security purposes. Within the nuclear enterprise, 
enriched uranium is required for nuclear weapons, production of 
tritium for use in nuclear weapons, and for naval nuclear 
propulsion.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Energy, in 
coordination with the Administrator for Nuclear Security, the 
Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Defense, to provide a 
briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by September 
15, 2016, assessing the options for ensuring a supply of 
enriched uranium for national security purposes for the long-
term. For the options considered, the briefing should provide a 
description and cost-benefit analysis, as well as timelines and 
costs. The briefing should also identify available and 
potentially available stocks of uranium, policy changes or 
international agreements that could be considered, and include 
any other matters that the Secretaries concerned and the 
Administrator determine appropriate.
    The committee also expects the Administrator to provide a 
briefing to the congressional defense committees on the results 
of the related cost study that the Office of Cost Estimating 
and Program Evaluation plans to prepare.

W78/88-1 Life Extension Program

    As noted in the committee report (H. Rept. 113-446) 
accompanying the Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015, the committee does not 
object, in principle, to the deferral of a first production 
unit from the W78/88-1 Life Extension Program (LEP) to fiscal 
year 2030. The committee notes the potential cost of this 
program and believes this deferral has allowed resources to be 
focused on higher priority programs, such as the W80-4 LEP. The 
committee is also aware of the recent JASON advisory panel 
report examining the viability and requirements of the ``3+2'' 
concept.
    The committee also notes the potential impact this deferral 
could have upon critical design and development skills within 
the nuclear security enterprise, if not mitigated in another 
manner. For instance, deferral of all funding for this program 
until fiscal year 2020, coupled with constrained funding in 
programs such as Enhanced Surety and R&D Certification and 
Safety, could place significant limits on efforts to develop 
and mature technical options and certification tools for this 
LEP. The committee notes ongoing technical, reliability, and 
cost challenges and uncertainties expected with this LEP. The 
committee encourages the Administrator for Nuclear Security and 
the Nuclear Weapons Council to review and consider what small 
investments, if any, may be warranted between now and fiscal 
year 2020 that could enhance critical design skills, develop 
technology options, improve understanding of certification 
challenges, and consider creative or novel design and 
manufacturing paradigms that could reduce costs and reliability 
challenges for the W78/88-1 LEP and other future Directed 
Stockpile Work.

W88 Alt 370 and W80-4 Life Extension Program

    The budget request contained $220.2 million for the W88 Alt 
370 program and $195.0 million for the W80-4 Life Extension 
Program (LEP).
    With the fiscal year 2016 budget request, the 
Administration has proposed significant changes for each of 
these programs. First, in November 2014 the Nuclear Weapons 
Council approved the addition of a ``refresh'' of the 
conventional high explosives within the W88 warhead as part of 
the ongoing W88 Alt 370 program. Based on review of stockpile 
assessment data, cost estimates, and proposed timelines for 
life extension programs, the committee supports this decision. 
As the W88 Alt 370 moves into Phase 6.4, Production 
Engineering, in fiscal year 2016, the committee expects the 
National Nuclear Security Administration to rigorously manage 
this additional work scope and provide additional transparency 
on its plans, and the related costs, benefits, and risks, 
through the Weapon Design Cost Report.
    Second, last year the Nuclear Weapons Council took action 
to align the production schedule of the cruise missile warhead 
LEP with the requirements of section 3119 of the Carl Levin and 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291), which required the 
Secretary of Energy to deliver a first production unit for the 
long-range standoff weapon by September 30, 2025. The committee 
believes this schedule will mitigate risks in the nation's 
standoff capabilities and ensure a consistent and manageable 
LEP workload within the nuclear security enterprise. The 
committee notes the Nuclear Weapons Council's decision to 
downselect to the W80 warhead for this LEP and looks forward to 
continued refinement of design options, requirements, and cost 
estimates as the LEP moves into Phase 6.2, Feasibility Study.
    The committee recommends $220.2 million for the W88 Alt 370 
program and $195.0 million for the W80-4 LEP, the full amount 
of the budget request.

Weapons dismantlement and disposition

    The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) plans 
to dismantle, by the end of fiscal year 2022, all U.S. nuclear 
weapons retired prior to fiscal year 2009. In an April 2014 
report, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) recommended 
that NNSA clarify its dismantlement performance goal and how 
NNSA measures progress towards this goal. The report stated 
that ``having clear goals and measures is a key element of 
program management,'' but, ``[b]ecause the dismantlement 
performance goal does not make these practices clear, NNSA 
risks providing misleading information about progress related 
to its goal.'' It noted that ``NNSA does not track the actual 
date that dismantled weapons were retired and may be counting 
some dismantled weapons retired after fiscal year 2009 as 
equivalent to weapons retired prior to fiscal year 2009,'' and, 
``NNSA will not dismantle some weapons retired prior to fiscal 
year 2009 but will reinstate them to the stockpile to save on 
rebuilding other weapons and count the reinstated weapons as 
equivalent dismantlements.'' The GAO also recommends NNSA 
consider extending the goal because it is unclear whether NNSA 
will meet the fiscal year 2022 date and, if the goal is 
successfully met, there will be a ``significant dismantlement 
workload gap during the mid-2020s.'' The GAO also found that 
``NNSA's ability to significantly accelerate dismantlement and 
complete planned workload earlier than fiscal year 2022 could 
be costly, and it is unclear whether Pantex would have 
sufficient capacity to do so.''
    To provide clarity on these matters, the committee directs 
the Administrator for Nuclear Security to provide a briefing to 
the House Committee on Armed Services by September 1, 2015, 
detailing the plan for dismantlement, including the timeline 
and the funding and capacity required to meet the NNSA's goal 
to dismantle nuclear weapons retired before 2009 by 2022. The 
committee expects this briefing to address dismantlement 
performance goals, including how dismantled weapons are 
counted, whether that goal should be extended, the risk of a 
significant dismantlement workload gap during the mid-2020s 
that could result in the loss of certified dismantlement 
personnel at Pantex, requirements at the Pantex site for 
effectively managing its component inventory management system, 
and any impacts of delaying any planned dismantlement of 
weapons retired prior to 2009 past 2022. The briefing should 
also include the Administrator's estimate of the capacity and 
costs for accelerating this goal, including any costs 
associated with increasing Pantex's capacity to address such an 
increased workload to accelerate this goal. In addition, the 
briefing should include any plans and assess the capacity for 
dismantlement of nuclear weapons retired since 2009.

                    Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation


Comptroller General assessment of Nonproliferation Research and 
        Development Program

    The National Nuclear Security Administration's Defense 
Nuclear Nonproliferation (DNN) program manages several efforts 
to research and develop technologies to prevent or combat the 
proliferation of nuclear materials. While the committee is 
supportive of efforts to explore and develop such technologies, 
the committee desires an independent assessment regarding how 
DNN manages and prioritizes these programs to create 
technologies that are actively deployed, as compared to longer-
term research and development efforts.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed 
Services by March 1, 2016, containing the Comptroller General's 
assessment of DNN's nonproliferation technology research and 
development efforts. In particular, the briefing should provide 
the Comptroller General's assessment of: (1) how much of the 
research and development conducted thus far under DNN's 
programs has translated into technologies that are actively 
deployed; (2) how the DNN program prioritizes technology 
research and development funding in support of near-term and 
long-term goals, including technology to improve monitoring, 
detection, and in-field inspection and analysis capabilities; 
(3) how the DNN program measures success in technology 
development efforts, the role deployment of technology plays in 
such measures, and to what extent DNN has met its performance 
measures; and (4) how the technology research and development 
program is managed and the roles of and funding for 
participating national laboratories.

Funding prioritization within Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation

    The budget request contained $1.94 billion for Defense 
Nuclear Nonproliferation (DNN). Of this amount, $426.8 million 
was requested for Global Material Security, $311.6 for Material 
Management and Minimization, and $419.3 million for DNN 
Research and Development (R&D).
    As in past years, within Global Material Security's Nuclear 
Smuggling Detection and Deterrence (NSDD) subprogram, the 
committee continues to question the value of fixed site 
detection units at major international border crossings and 
ports in deterring and intercepting nuclear weapons-usable 
special nuclear material. The committee believes NSDD funds 
would be better focused on mobile detection capabilities to 
reduce the risk of nuclear smuggling. Therefore, the committee 
recommends $336.8, a decrease of $90.0 million, for Global 
Material Security. Elsewhere in this title, the committee 
includes a provision that would deauthorize the subprogram 
related to fixed site radiological monitors.
    The committee recommends an increase in funding for higher 
priority efforts within DNN. The committee recommends $331.6 
million, an increase of $20.0 million, for Material Management 
and Minimization, to allow acceleration of clean-out efforts 
and security upgrades at the highest-risk sites in countries 
other than the Russian Federation. The committee recommends 
$439.3 million, an increase of $20.0 million, for DNN R&D, to 
support early research and development of next-generation 
verification and remote sensing technologies.
    Overall, the committee recommends $1.90 billion, a decrease 
of $39.0 million, for Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation.

Nuclear Counterterrorism and Incident Response Program

    The budget request contained $234.4 million for the Nuclear 
Counterterrorism and Incident Response Program of the National 
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). This program, which the 
budget request proposes to move from Weapons Activities into 
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, is responsible for countering 
nuclear terror threats, responding to nuclear incidents 
worldwide, and providing the Department of Energy's emergency 
management capability.
    As one of the most direct contributions NNSA makes to the 
nation's warfighters, the committee highlights the importance 
and value of NNSA's programs that help counter and respond to 
nuclear terrorism threats. These programs leverage unique 
technical knowledge and tools enabled by NNSA's nuclear weapons 
program to detect, evaluate, disable, and respond to any 
potential nuclear threat. The committee notes that the ability 
to provide the nation's responders with detailed technical 
information on nuclear threats is dependent upon robust and 
timely communication between those responders and NNSA experts. 
The committee believes the Administrator for Nuclear Security 
must ensure that the knowledge, tools, and communications 
systems that are the foundation of this program remain strong.
    The committee notes the serious deficiencies within the 
Department of Energy's emergency management program that were 
identified by the February 2014 incidents at the Waste 
Isolation Pilot Plant and further highlighted by the Defense 
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board and various other entities. As 
the emergency management lead for the entire Department of 
Energy, the NNSA Associate Administrator for Emergency 
Operations shoulders a unique responsibility for preparing for 
and responding to a broad spectrum of emergencies. The range of 
emergencies the Department must be prepared for range from 
those faced by any organization to nuclear weapon accidents. 
The committee believes the Secretary of Energy and the 
Administrator, acting through the Associate Administrator for 
Emergency Operations, should undertake a comprehensive 
assessment of the Department's emergency management program, 
develop actions and a risk-based investment plan to address any 
deficiencies, and carry out swift remedies.
    The committee recommends $245.4 million for the Nuclear 
Counterterrorism and Incident Response Program, an increase of 
$11.0 million, to support emergency management enhancements 
across the nuclear security enterprise, as well as upgrades to 
the communications systems utilized by nuclear incident 
response teams.

Verification and detection technology

    The committee continues to support the need for improved 
interagency coordination and focus on verification and 
detection technology research and development (R&D) to address 
current and future proliferation threats, and notes the 
potential challenges associated with the spread of nuclear 
energy and new technologies, such as additive manufacturing, 
that could impact nuclear proliferation. The committee agrees 
with the 2014 Defense Science Board report, ``Assessment of 
Nuclear Monitoring and Verification Technologies,'' which 
concluded that ``monitoring for proliferation should be a top 
national security objective, but one for which the nation is 
not yet organized or fully equipped to address.''
    The committee notes that section 3133 of the Carl Levin and 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) requires the 
President to submit, not later than September 1, 2015, a 
comprehensive national plan for verification and monitoring to 
address the potential proliferation of nuclear weapons, 
components of such weapons, and fissile material, including 
policy, operations, and research, development, testing, and 
evaluation efforts. The committee understands that this plan is 
being developed and expects that it will be delivered to 
Congress on time. The committee also reiterates its expectation 
that the Department of Energy (DOE) and the National Nuclear 
Security Administration keep the committee informed on the 
development of this plan and on improving focus and investments 
in these areas.
    The committee also notes the March 2015 Secretary of Energy 
Advisory Board (SEAB) ``Report of the Task Force on Nuclear 
Nonproliferation,'' that recommended improving research and 
development on new verification and nonproliferation 
technologies. The report stated that DOE's ``approach of 
spreading nonproliferation R&D investment to large numbers of 
laboratories in small increments is inhibiting nonproliferation 
technology innovation within the labs,'' and that ``it may 
still be difficult for high-risk, `out of the box' ideas to get 
funded.''
    Therefore, elsewhere in this Act, the committee recommends 
an increase of $20.0 million for nonproliferation and 
verification R&D. The committee intends this increase in 
funding to support R&D of next-generation verification and 
remote sensing technology, as well as R&D on high-risk, high-
reward ideas as recommended by the SEAB report.

                             Naval Reactors


Naval Reactors and Spent Fuel Handling Recapitalization Project

    The budget request contained $1.38 billion for the Naval 
Reactors program. Naval Reactors is responsible for all aspects 
of naval nuclear propulsion efforts, including reactor plant 
technology design and development, reactor plant operation and 
maintenance, and reactor retirement and disposal. The program 
ensures the safe and reliable operation of reactor plants in 
nuclear-powered submarines and aircraft carriers that comprise 
over 40 percent of the Navy's major combatants.
    The committee is concerned that, due to funding challenges, 
Naval Reactors has only recently been able to begin a project 
to replace its Expended Core Facility (ECF) in Idaho. This 
facility, which handles and processes spent naval nuclear fuel, 
is over 60 years old and the water pool that is central to the 
operation of the facility is deteriorating. The current ECF is 
also physically unable to handle and process the larger spent 
fuel assemblies being off-loaded from modern aircraft carriers. 
Because of delays in construction of the Spent Fuel Handling 
Recapitalization Project, which will replace the ECF with a 
modern facility, the U.S. Navy has bought several otherwise 
unnecessary and expensive temporary storage and transportation 
containers to hold the spent aircraft carrier fuel while 
awaiting construction of the new facility.
    The committee recommends $1.39 billion, an increase of 
$12.0 million, for the Naval Reactors program to support 
acceleration of the Spent Fuel Handling Recapitalization 
Project.

                     Federal Salaries and Expenses


Classification guidance

    The committee notes the Department of Energy Inspector 
General's February 2015 report (DOE/IG-0935) that reviewed Los 
Alamos National Laboratory's (LANL) classification program 
found that LANL's, ``Classification Officer had not always 
adequately protected and controlled classified information 
resulting in the misclassification and improper disclosure of 
sensitive, national security information.'' The Inspector 
General's investigation revealed six incidents in which LANL 
documents were misclassified. The report concluded that the 
classification officer had not always ensured that derivative 
classifiers had appropriate and updated classification 
bulletins, including detailed interpretive guidance; had not 
classified information properly; and had not always reported 
security incidents as required.
    The committee notes the importance, across the nuclear 
security enterprise and particularly at a national security 
laboratory, of consistent and rigorous application of 
classification standards. The committee is concerned about the 
inadequate response by LANL leadership on this problem and the 
lack of awareness of National Nuclear Security Administration 
officials. The committee directs the Administrator for Nuclear 
Security to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed 
Services, not later than July 31, 2015, on the measures taken 
to improve the effectiveness of the classification process and 
related oversight.

Director for Cost Estimating and Program Evaluation

    The committee notes that section 3112 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-
66) established a Director for Cost Estimating and Program 
Evaluation (CEPE) to improve the National Nuclear Security 
Administration's (NNSA) cost estimating and program management. 
The committee is encouraged that NNSA has stood up this 
position but notes that progress hiring experienced staff to 
support the Director is taking time. The committee recognizes 
the challenges of standing up a new office staffed by personnel 
with the requisite and unique expertise required may be 
difficult, but believes this is a crucial capability needed to 
continue rebuilding NNSA's trust and credibility with Congress.
    The committee is aware of the plan to have CEPE staff train 
alongside the staff of the Department of Defense's Office of 
Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE). The committee 
encourages the Director to ensure CEPE staff receive effective 
training and meaningful experience in this manner, and restates 
the importance of the joint NNSA and Department of Defense 
implementation plan to standing up this new office. The 
committee reiterates the statement contained in the Joint 
Explanatory Statement accompanying the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, which states, ``we 
expect the DOD CAPE to play an active role in not only training 
personnel of the new NNSA office, but helping shape and ensure 
quality cost estimates and program evaluations during the early 
years of the new NNSA office.'' The committee is hopeful that 
CEPE, coupled with this initial interagency collaboration, will 
prove effective in improving NNSA's track record on program 
management and cost estimation, particularly for major 
projects.

Improvements to National Nuclear Security Administration budget 
        structure

    In the committee report (H. Rept. 113-446) accompanying the 
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2015, the committee noted that it was 
encouraged by an effort by the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) and the White House Office of Management 
and Budget to propose an updated and streamlined NNSA budget 
structure that would provide better transparency, increased 
efficiency and flexibility, and greater focus on NNSA's mission 
and priorities. The committee is concerned that this effort has 
been slow and has lacked transparency. The committee believes 
the Administrator for Nuclear Security should make every effort 
to revive this effort and improve dialogue with Congress on the 
matter. The committee continues to believe that, if carefully 
considered with input from all stakeholders, an improved budget 
structure can increase efficiency and agility for NNSA programs 
while also ensuring robust transparency and accountability. The 
committee expects the Administrator to consult closely with the 
committee as budget structure changes are considered.

Labor cost review

    As part of previous efforts to improve the Department of 
Defense's visibility into National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) programs, the Department of Defense 
Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) 
conducted reviews of labor costs at the facilities comprising 
NNSA's nuclear security enterprise. The committee believes 
these reviews should be updated and may provide significant 
insight into improvement of NNSA's cost accounting systems, 
financial reporting standardization efforts, and overall 
efficiency.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Director of Cost 
Assessment and Program Evaluation, supported by the Director of 
the NNSA Office of Cost Estimating and Program Evaluation, to 
provide to the House Committee on Armed Services by November 
15, 2015, a briefing on the labor costs at each facility of 
NNSA's nuclear security enterprise and the laboratories of the 
Naval Reactors program. The briefing shall include an 
assessment of the various components that comprise total labor 
costs at each NNSA facility and the laboratories of the Naval 
Reactors program as compared to similar, comparable high-
technology facilities and defense entities in the United States 
(including other facilities of the Department of Energy); 
accounting practices with regards to direct and indirect costs 
as compared to typical defense contractors or federally funded 
research and development centers; effects of labor costs on 
spending for materials, equipment, and other non-labor 
resources; and, such other matters as the Director of CAPE 
determines appropriate. The briefing shall also discuss both 
base labor costs and labor cost-rate growth at the comparable 
entities reviewed. In addition, the briefing should include the 
recommendations of the Director of CAPE for modifying NNSA's 
cost accounting and financial reporting structure to accurately 
reflect direct and indirect costs, improve financial reporting 
standardization, and improve efficiency while continuing to 
attract and retain highly-qualified personnel. To facilitate 
this briefing, the committee directs the Administrator for 
Nuclear Security to provide the Director of CAPE full access to 
all information, including information from the management and 
operating contractors of the NNSA, as well as the resources the 
Director of CAPE determines are required to carry out this 
review.

Provision of information to Congress by management and operating 
        contractors

    The committee reaffirms and restates its statutory 
prerogative to both receive and seek information, advice, and 
professional views related to their mission from the 
laboratories and plants of the nuclear security enterprise. 
These exchanges are critical to enabling the committee's 
understanding and oversight of the complex issues related to 
the National Nuclear Security Administration's mission and must 
not be restricted or hindered in any way. However, the 
committee cautions that unsolicited requests from management 
and operating contractors of the nuclear security enterprise 
for funding increases or legislative changes may be construed 
as lobbying. The committee urges the directors of the 
laboratories and plants of the nuclear security enterprise to 
be mindful of restrictions on lobbying and clear on 
distinctions between providing program updates or other 
information which help inform the committee's work, as compared 
to advocacy on behalf of certain programs.

Reforming and streamlining access authorizations for Restricted Data

    The committee continues to emphasize efforts to streamline 
Government operations, seek efficiencies, and apply cost 
savings directly to defense missions. The committee is aware of 
a proposal within the Department of Energy to reform and 
streamline processes regarding access authorizations for 
Restricted Data. Such an effort may allow elimination of the 
separate ``Q'' and ``L'' access authorization process 
administered by the Secretary of Energy and instead institute 
Restricted Data as a compartment of sensitive information 
administered by the Secretary of Energy within the broader 
Government's access authorization program. If properly planned 
and executed, this effort could significantly streamline work 
among the agencies that deal with Restricted Data, reduce the 
number of personnel with access to Restricted Data that do not 
have a direct requirement for such access to carry out their 
work activities, and provide substantial cost savings. However, 
the committee cautions that any such effort must maintain 
commensurate and rigorous security measures for Restricted 
Data.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Energy, 
in coordination with the Secretary of Defense and the Director 
of National Intelligence, to provide the House Committee on 
Armed Services a briefing by November 1, 2015, on the risks and 
benefits of making such a change, as well as on the potential 
costs and cost-savings, and whether they recommend pursuing a 
plan for reforming and streamlining processes regarding access 
authorizations for Restricted Data.

               Environmental and Other Defense Activities


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2016 contained $6.30 
billion for environmental and other defense activities. The 
committee recommends $5.92 billion, a decrease of $380.0 
million to the budget request.

                     Defense Environmental Cleanup


Hanford and Savannah River

    The budget request for Defense Environmental Cleanup 
contained $843.8 million for cleanup activities at the Hanford 
Site (excluding the Office of River Protection, which is 
authorized at $1.41 billion, the amount of the budget request) 
and $1.21 billion for cleanup activities at the Savannah River 
Site. As the two primary production sites for plutonium during 
the Cold War, long-term cleanup efforts at these sites are top 
priorities of the program.
    The committee supports increased levels of effort at both 
sites to reduce risk and accelerate the most critical cleanup 
efforts. Therefore, the committee recommends $915.8 million, an 
increase of $72.0 million, for cleanup activities at the 
Hanford Site, and $1.22 billion, an increase of $11.6 million, 
for cleanup activities at the Savannah River Site.

Report on pension adjustments

    The committee is aware that retired employees from various 
facilities of the National Nuclear Security Administration's 
nuclear security enterprise and the Department of Energy's 
Office of Environmental Management defense environmental 
cleanup program have been under financial strain due to fixed 
pension payments. For instance, retirees from the Savannah 
River Site have not received a cost-of-living adjustment in 
their pension payments for over fifteen years. With an increase 
in inflation of 30 percent since that time, the committee is 
concerned that the lack of pension adjustments may not be 
commensurate with other government and public sector pension 
plans over that period of time.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Energy to 
provide a briefing on pension cost-of-living adjustments to the 
House Committee on Armed Services by January 31, 2016. This 
briefing shall include the following elements:
    (1) An assessment and comparison of pension plan cost-of-
living adjustments since 2000 for retirees from Department of 
Energy facilities, including those of the nuclear security 
enterprise and defense environmental cleanup sites as compared 
to other facilities of the Department;
    (2) An assessment and comparison of how such cost-of-living 
adjustments since 2000 compare to those in other U.S. 
Government pension plans and comparable public sector pension 
plans; and
    (3) An assessment of the impacts on site operations, the 
current workforce, and the costs associated with providing a 
cost-of-living adjustment to any pension plan that has not 
received one for more than ten years.

Technology development

    The budget request contained $14.5 million for the 
technology development program of the Office of Environmental 
Management. This program provides key investments in mid- to 
long-term research and development efforts that seek to develop 
new technologies to reduce cleanup costs and accelerate cleanup 
schedules.
    The committee has long been supportive of this program 
because it believes that, since the defense environmental 
cleanup program is expected to last until 2070 and cost 
hundreds of billions of dollars, even small amounts of funding 
invested in technology development efforts have the potential 
to provide large cost savings to taxpayers through new or more 
efficient cleanup methods. Therefore, the committee recommends 
$18.5 million, an increase of $4.0 million, for the technology 
development program.

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant

    The committee continues to monitor the investigations and 
corrective actions resulting from the February 2014 incidents 
at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in Carlsbad, New 
Mexico. The committee has reviewed a series of reports on the 
incidents, including the most recent Phase 2 Report of the 
Department of Energy's Accident Investigation Board (AIB) 
examining the root cause of the February 14, 2014, release of 
radioactive material from a transuranic waste drum underground 
at WIPP. The AIB found that the release was caused by a 
reaction involving incompatible materials in a drum that was 
processed at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in December 
2013 and sent to WIPP. The AIB concluded that, ``if LANL had 
adequately developed and implemented repackaging and treatment 
procedures that incorporated suitable hazard controls and 
included a rigorous review and approval process, the release 
would have been preventable.'' Separate investigations have 
found serious deficiencies in the emergency management and 
response actions taken at WIPP during and after the event.
    The committee expects the Secretary of Energy and the 
Administrator for Nuclear Security to seriously consider all of 
the recommendations resulting from the various investigations 
into the events at WIPP. Efforts to improve operations, 
oversight, and emergency response at WIPP are well underway, 
but the committee expects these important lessons learned to be 
transferred across the Department. Furthermore, the committee 
expects the Secretary and the Administrator to continue to take 
robust action to hold accountable the officials and contractors 
responsible for these failures.

                     Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal


Defense nuclear waste repository

    The committee notes the Secretary of Energy's recent 
proposal to seek a separate geological repository for high-
level defense nuclear waste. While the committee believes a 
pathway for final disposition of high-level defense waste from 
facilities such as the Hanford Site and the Savannah River Site 
is necessary, the committee is concerned that construction and 
operation of a defense-only repository would require 
significant funding from the already-oversubscribed national 
defense budget function. With the many defense priorities 
facing the Department of Energy in the next decade, the 
committee expresses caution that construction of a high-level 
defense waste repository must not come at the expense of 
currently planned priorities in atomic energy defense 
activities. The committee will continue to conduct oversight of 
this matter as the plans develop.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


         Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations


         Section 3101--National Nuclear Security Administration

    This section would authorize appropriations for the 
National Nuclear Security Administration for fiscal year 2016, 
including funds for weapons activities, defense nuclear 
nonproliferation programs, naval reactor programs, and Federal 
Salaries and Expenses (formerly known as the Office of the 
Administrator), at the levels identified in section 4701 of 
division D of this Act. This section would also authorize a new 
plant project for the National Nuclear Security Administration.

              Section 3102--Defense Environmental Cleanup

    This section would authorize appropriations for defense 
environmental cleanup activities for fiscal year 2016, at the 
levels identified in section 4701 of division D of this Act.

                 Section 3103--Other Defense Activities

    This section would authorize appropriations for other 
defense activities for the Department of Energy for fiscal year 
2016 at the levels identified in section 4701 of division D of 
this Act.

   Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations


Section 3111--Authorized Personnel Levels of National Nuclear Security 
                             Administration

    This section would amend section 3241A of the National 
Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2441a) to 
require that, by October 1, 2016, the total number of employees 
within the Office of the Administrator may not exceed 1,350.
    This section would also amend section 3241 of the National 
Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2441) by 
striking ``600'' and inserting ``450'' as the number of 
employees allowed to be appointed under the authority provided 
by such section. This section would also clarify that any 
employees appointed pursuant to the authority provided by such 
section 3241 would not be counted for the purposes of the cap 
of 1,350 employees. To facilitate transparency, this section 
would require the Administrator for Nuclear Security to include 
certain information regarding the number of various types of 
employees within the Office of the Administrator in each annual 
budget request submission.

     Section 3112--Full-time Equivalent Contractor Personnel Levels

    This section would amend section 3241A of the National 
Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2441a) to 
specify that the total number of full-time equivalent employees 
working under a service support contract of the NNSA may not 
exceed the number that is 30 percent of the number of employees 
of the Office of the Administrator authorized under subsection 
(a)(1) of such section 3241A. The Administrator for Nuclear 
Security would be required to not exceed this total number of 
full-time equivalent contractor employees unless, during each 
fiscal year in which the Administrator exceeds such authorized 
number, the Administrator submits a report to the congressional 
defense committees justifying such excess.
    This section would also require the Administrator to 
submit, with each fiscal year budget request, information on: 
(1) the number of full-time equivalent employees of the Office 
of the Administrator; (2) the number of service support 
contracts of the NNSA; (3) the number of full-time equivalent 
contractor employees working under each service support 
contract; and (4) the number of full-time equivalent contractor 
employees that have been employed under a service support 
contract for a period greater than two years.
    Section 3113--Improvement to Accountability of Department 
of Energy Employees and Projects
    This section would amend subtitle C of the National Nuclear 
Security Administration (NNSA) Act (50 U.S.C. 2441) to add a 
new section requiring the Secretary of Energy and the 
Administrator for Nuclear Security to jointly notify, at the 
time of the annual budget request, the appropriate 
congressional committees of the number of covered employees 
whose security clearance was revoked during the previous year 
and the length of time such employees were employed by the 
Department of Energy or NNSA since such revocation. In 
addition, whenever the Secretary or the Administrator 
terminates the employment of a covered employee or removes and 
reassigns a covered employee for cause, the Secretary or the 
Administrator shall notify the appropriate congressional 
committees of such termination or reassignment by not later 
than 30 days after the date of such termination or 
reassignment.
    This section would also require that not later than 30 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary and 
the Administrator shall jointly submit to the congressional 
defense committees, the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the 
House of Representatives, and the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources of the Senate written certification that the 
Secretary and the Administrator possess the authorities needed 
to terminate the employment of an employee for cause relating 
to improper program management.
    This section would require that the Secretary or the 
Administrator may not pay to a covered employee a bonus during 
the one-year period beginning on the date on which the 
Secretary or the Administrator determines that the covered 
employee committed improper program management. This section 
includes a waiver on a case-by-case basis if the Secretary or 
the Administrator notifies the appropriate congressional 
committees of such waiver and a period of 60 days elapses 
following such notification.
    This section would modify subtitle A of title 47 of the 
Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2741) to add the sense of 
Congress that the Administrator should use all contractual 
remedies available to the Administrator, including through the 
withholding of all award fees, in case in which the 
Administrator determines that a contractor of a covered project 
is responsible for delaying the project; reducing the scope of 
the project; increasing the cost of the project; or undermines 
health, safety, and security. At or about the time that the 
President's budget request is submitted to Congress, this 
section would require the Administrator to certify to the 
appropriate congressional committees that each covered project 
is being carried out on time, on budget, and within the planned 
scope of the project, while protecting health, safety, and 
security. Not later than 30 days after the date on which the 
Administrator makes each certification, the Administrator shall 
notify the appropriate congressional committees of any covered 
project for which the Administrator could not make such a 
certification; except as provided in the section, an 
explanation as to whether termination of contract for the 
project is an appropriate remedy, a description of the terms of 
the contract regarding award fees and performance, and a 
description of how the Administrator plans to exercise 
contractual options; and, in the case in which the 
Administrator could not make such certification or provide such 
information by reason of a contract enforcement action, a 
notification of such contract enforcement action and the date 
on which the Administrator plans to submit the information 
described.

 Section 3114--Cost-Benefit Analyses for Competition of Management and 
                          Operating Contracts

    This section would amend section 3121 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-
239) to require that the report submitted by the Administrator 
for Nuclear Security pursuant to section 3121 must include a 
description of the factors considered and processes used by the 
Administrator to determine: (1) whether to compete or extend a 
contract to manage and operate a facility of the nuclear 
security enterprise; and (2) whether and which activities at 
the facility should be covered under the management and 
operating contract rather than under a different contract. The 
report would also be required to include a detailed description 
of the analyses conducted by the Administrator to reach the 
conclusions presented in the report, including any assumptions, 
limitations, and uncertainties relating to such conclusions.
    This section would also extend the requirement for the 
Administrator to submit a report under section 3121 of Public 
Law 112-239 by 2 years, through fiscal year 2019. Finally, this 
section also would express the sense of Congress regarding 
competition of management and operating contracts of the 
nuclear security enterprise.

       Section 3115--Nuclear Weapon Design Responsiveness Program

    This section would express the sense of Congress that: (1) 
a modern and responsive nuclear weapons infrastructure is only 
one component of a nuclear posture that is agile, flexible, and 
responsive to change; and (2) to ensure the nuclear deterrent 
of the United States remains safe, secure, reliable, credible, 
and responsive, the United States must continually exercise all 
capabilities required to conceptualize, study, design, develop, 
engineer, certify, produce, and deploy nuclear weapons.
    This section would also amend the Atomic Energy Defense Act 
(50 U.S.C. 2521) to establish that it is the policy of the 
United States to sustain, enhance, and continually exercise all 
capabilities required to conceptualize, study, design, develop, 
engineer, certify, produce, and deploy nuclear weapons to 
ensure the nuclear deterrent of the United States remains safe, 
secure, reliable, credible, and responsive. The Secretary of 
Energy, acting through the Administrator for Nuclear Security 
and in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, would be 
required to carry out a program in parallel with the stockpile 
stewardship program and stockpile management program to fulfill 
this policy. This section would also stipulate a series of 
objectives for this program. Finally, this section would amend 
certain existing annual reporting requirements to ensure robust 
attention on the program by senior leaders and enable 
congressional oversight of the status and effectiveness of the 
program.
    The committee notes that this section does not authorize 
the development and production of new or modified nuclear 
weapons, and does not modify the statutory requirement 
contained in section 4209 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 
U.S.C. 2529) for the Secretary of Energy to seek congressional 
authorization by making specific requests for funding if the 
Secretary seeks to carry out activities that are intended to 
lead to production of new or modified nuclear weapons.

         Section 3116--Disposition of Weapons-Usable Plutonium

    This section would require the Secretary of Energy to carry 
out construction and program support activities for the Mixed 
Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility with any funds authorized 
to be appropriated or otherwise made available for such 
purposes for fiscal year 2016 and any prior fiscal years.
    This section would also require the Secretary to include in 
the budget justification materials submitted to Congress for 
fiscal year 2017 an updated performance baseline for 
construction and project support activities relating to the MOX 
facility.

   Section 3117--Prohibition on Availability of Funds for Fixed Site 
           Radiological Portal Monitors in Foreign Countries

    This section would prohibit any funds authorized by this 
Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 or any 
fiscal year thereafter for the National Nuclear Security 
Administration from being obligated or expended for the 
research and development, installation, or sustainment of fixed 
site radiological portal monitors or equipment for use in 
foreign countries. This section would clarify that this 
prohibition does not apply to such activities for mobile 
radiological inspection equipment.

  Section 3118--Prohibition on Availability of Funds for Provision of 
   Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Assistance to Russian Federation

    This section would provide that none of the funds 
authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made 
available for fiscal year 2016 for defense nuclear 
nonproliferation activities may be obligated or expended to 
enter into a contract with, or otherwise provide assistance to, 
the Russian Federation. The Secretary of Energy, without 
delegation, would be provided the authority to waive this 
prohibition if the Secretary submits a report to the 
appropriate congressional committees containing notification 
that such a waiver is in the national security interest of the 
United States, a justification for such waiver, and a period of 
15 days elapses.

  Section 3119--Limitation on Authorization of Production of Special 
  Nuclear Material Outside the United States by Foreign Country with 
                    Nuclear Naval Propulsion Program

    This section would require that, prior to the approval by 
the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) of any part 810 authorization (regarding 
the transfer of certain civil nuclear technology) for a foreign 
state with a nuclear naval propulsion program, the Director of 
National Intelligence and the Chief of Naval Operations shall 
submit an assessment to the specified congressional committees 
on the risks of diversion, and the likely consequences of such 
diversion, of technology authorized by such part 810 
authorization to such foreign state's nuclear naval propulsion 
program.
    This section would also require that, not less than 90 days 
prior to the approval of any part 810 authorization for a 
foreign state with a nuclear naval propulsion program, the 
Administrator of the NNSA shall certify to the specified 
congressional committees that there is sufficient diversion 
control and such transfer presents a minimal risk of diversion 
of such technology to a military program that would degrade the 
technical advantage of the United States.

 Section 3120--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Development of 
             Certain Nuclear Nonproliferation Technologies

    This section would prohibit any funds authorized to be 
appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal 
year 2016 for the National Nuclear Security Administration's 
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation program from being obligated 
or expended to develop nonproliferation or arms control 
verification or monitoring technologies beyond Technology 
Readiness Level 5 (TRL 5) unless the Secretary of Energy 
certifies that such technologies are being developed to fulfill 
the rights or obligations of the United States under either: 
(1) a current arms control or nonproliferation treaty or 
agreement; or (2) a treaty or agreement that the Secretary 
expects will enter into force within 2 years. The Secretary 
would be required to submit this written certification to the 
appropriate congressional committees and include, for each 
technology the Secretary certifies for development beyond TRL 
5, an identification of the amount of fiscal year 2016 funds 
that will used and how such development helps to fulfill the 
rights or obligations of the United States under the treaty or 
agreement.
    This section would also provide the Secretary the authority 
to waive this prohibition if the Secretary determines the 
waiver is in the national security interests of the United 
States and submits a certification of such determination to the 
appropriate congressional committees 15 days prior to carrying 
out the waiver.

   Section 3121--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Unilateral 
                              Disarmament

     This section would provide that, of the funds authorized 
to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for 
any of fiscal years 2016 through 2020 for the National Nuclear 
Security Administration (NNSA), not more than $50.0 million may 
be obligated or expended in each such fiscal year to carry out 
nuclear weapons dismantlement and disposition activities.
    This section would also prohibit any funds authorized to be 
appropriated by this Act, or otherwise made available for any 
of fiscal years 2016 through 2020, to be obligated or expended 
to dismantle a nuclear weapon of the United States unless: (1) 
the nuclear weapon was retired on or before September 30, 2008; 
(2) the Administrator for Nuclear Security certifies that the 
components of the nuclear weapon are directly required for the 
purposes of a current life extension program; or (3) the 
President certifies that the nuclear weapon is being dismantled 
pursuant to a nuclear arms reduction treaty or similar 
international agreement that has entered into force after the 
date of enactment of this Act and was approved with the advice 
and consent of the Senate or by an Act of Congress.
    This section would also prohibit any funding authorized to 
be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for any 
of fiscal years 2016 through 2020 from being used to dismantle 
or dispose of a W84 nuclear weapon.
    Finally, this section would include an exception to these 
prohibitions for any activities necessary to conduct 
maintenance or surveillance of the nuclear weapons stockpile or 
activities to ensure the safety or reliability of the nuclear 
weapons stockpile.

  Section 3122--Use of Best Practices for Capital Asset Projects and 
                 Nuclear Weapon Life Extension Programs

    This section would require that, within 30 days of the date 
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy, in 
coordination with the Administrator for Nuclear Security, shall 
ensure that analyses of alternatives are conducted (including 
through contractors, as appropriate) in accordance with best 
practices for capital asset projects and life extension 
programs of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) 
as well as capital asset projects relating to defense 
environmental management.
    This section would also require that, within 30 days of the 
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary, in 
coordination with the Administrator, shall develop cost 
estimates in accordance with cost estimating best practices for 
capital asset projects and life extension programs of NNSA as 
well as capital asset projects relating to defense 
environmental management.
    Finally, this section would require that, as soon as 
practicable, but not later than 2 years after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall revise:
    (1) The capital asset project management order of the 
Department of Energy to require the use of best practices for 
preparing cost estimates and for conducting analyses of 
alternatives for NNSA and defense environmental management 
capital asset projects; and
    (2) The nuclear weapon life extension program procedures of 
the Department to require the use of best practices for 
preparing cost estimates and conducting analyses of 
alternatives for NNSA life extension programs.

                     Subtitle C--Plans and Reports


      Section 3131--Root Cause Analyses for Certain Cost Overruns

    This section would amend section 4713(c) of the Atomic 
Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2753) to require the Secretary of 
Energy to conduct and submit to the congressional defense 
committees a root cause assessment when certain programs 
experience a significant cost overrun. The assessment would be 
required to include the contribution of any shortcomings in 
cost, schedule, or performance of the program, including the 
role, if any, of the following: (1) unrealistic performance 
expectations; (2) unrealistic baseline estimates for cost or 
schedule; (3) immature technologies or excessive manufacturing 
or integration risk; (4) unanticipated design, engineering, 
manufacturing, or technology integration issues arising during 
program performance; (5) changes in procurement quantities; (6) 
inadequate program funding or funding instability; (7) poor 
performance by personnel of the Federal Government or 
contractor personnel responsible for program management; or (8) 
any other matters.

 Section 3132--Extension and Modification of Certain Annual Reports on 
                        Nuclear Nonproliferation

    This section would amend section 3122(c) of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-
81) by striking the date of 2016 and inserting 2020. This 
section would also amend such subsection to clarify that, in 
the Secretary of Energy's annual assessment, the Secretary must 
(1) identify any highly-enriched uranium around the world that 
is obligated by the United States and (2) provide a list, by 
country and by site, of the separated plutonium around the 
world, identify such plutonium that is obligated by the United 
States, and provide an assessment of the vulnerability of such 
plutonium to theft or diversion.

 Section 3133--Governance and Management of Nuclear Security Enterprise

    This section would express the sense of Congress regarding 
governance and management problems with respect to the nuclear 
security enterprise, the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA), and the Department of Energy.
    This section would also require the Secretary of Energy and 
the Administrator for Nuclear Security to jointly establish a 
team of senior officials from the Department of Energy and NNSA 
to develop and carry out an implementation plan to reform 
governance and management to improve the effectiveness and 
efficiency of the nuclear security enterprise. The plan would 
be required to be developed and implemented in accordance with 
the National Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 
2401), the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2501), and any 
other provision of law. This section would require the team to 
be co-chaired by the Deputy Secretary of Energy and the 
Administrator for Nuclear Security. The plan developed by the 
team would be required to address all recommendations contained 
in certain studies (including the final report of the advisory 
panel established by section 3166 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239)), 
except those requiring legislative action to carry out. The 
Secretary and the Administrator would be required to submit the 
plan to the appropriate congressional committees by January 30, 
2016.
    This section would also require the Administrator to seek 
to enter into a joint agreement with the National Academy of 
Sciences and the National Academy of Public Administration to 
establish a panel of external, independent experts to evaluate 
the plan developed by the Department of Energy and NNSA and to 
evaluate the implementation of such plan. The panel's duties 
would include providing advice to the Secretary and the 
Administrator on the plan, tracking its implementation, and 
assessing its effectiveness. The panel would also be required 
to submit several reports to the appropriate congressional 
committees and the Secretary and the Administrator. In 
addition, the Secretary and the Administrator would be required 
to provide full and timely access to all information, 
personnel, and systems that the panel determines necessary.
    Finally, this section includes rules of construction that 
nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize any 
action: (1) in contravention of section 3220 of the National 
Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2410); or (2) 
that would undermine or weaken health, safety, or security.

 Section 3134--Assessments on Nuclear Proliferation Risks and Nuclear 
                     Nonproliferation Opportunities

    This section would require the Director of National 
Intelligence to submit a report to the appropriate 
congressional committees, by March 1 of each year from 2016-20, 
containing: (1) an assessment and prioritization of 
international nuclear proliferation risks and nuclear 
nonproliferation opportunities; and (2) an assessment of the 
effectiveness of various means and programs for addressing such 
risks and opportunities.

 Section 3135--Independent Review of Laboratory-Directed Research and 
                          Development Programs

    This section would require the Administrator for Nuclear 
Security to seek to enter into a contract with the JASON 
Defense Advisory Panel to conduct a review of the laboratory-
directed research and development (LDRD) program authorized 
under section 4811 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 
2791). The review would be required to include assessments of 
whether and how the projects within the LDRD program support 
the mission of the National Nuclear Security Administration 
(NNSA), whether the science conducted under LDRD underpin the 
advancement of scientific understanding necessary for NNSA's 
core programs, the scientific and programmatic opportunities 
and challenges in the LDRD program, recent significant 
accomplishments and failures within the LDRD program, and how 
LDRD projects are selected for funding. This section would 
require the Administrator to submit to the congressional 
defense committees, by November 1, 2016, a report containing 
the review carried out by the JASON Defense Advisory Panel.
    This section would also require a briefing to the 
congressional defense committees by the Comptroller General of 
the United States by November 1, 2016. The Comptroller General 
would be required to assess: how NNSA LDRD funding limits 
compare to other Department of Energy and Department of Defense 
laboratories and federally funded research and development 
centers; how many NNSA personnel are supported by LDRD funding, 
including how many receive a majority of their compensation 
from LDRD; and how many devote the majority of their time to 
LDRD programs for more than three years.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters


    Section 3141--Transfer, Decontamination, and Decommissioning of 
                       Nonoperational Facilities

    This section would require the Secretary of Energy to 
establish and carry out a plan under which the Administrator 
for Nuclear Security transfers to the Assistant Secretary of 
Energy for Environmental Management the responsibility for 
decontaminating and decommissioning facilities of the National 
Nuclear Security Administration that the Secretary of Energy 
determines are not operational as of the date of the enactment 
of this Act and meet the requirements for such transfer. The 
plan would be required to include:
    (1) A schedule for transferring the facilities within 3 
years;
    (2) A prioritized list and schedule, including how such 
priorities and schedules integrate with other facility 
disposition priorities and schedules of the Office of 
Environmental Management; and,
    (3) A description of the estimated life-cycle costs for the 
facilities.
    The Secretary of Energy would be required to submit the 
plan to the appropriate congressional committees, along with 
any additional views of the Secretary, by February 15, 2016.

 Section 3142--Research and Development of Advanced Naval Nuclear Fuel 
                  System Based on Low-Enriched Uranium

    This section would require that, of the funds authorized to 
be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for 
fiscal year 2016 for defense nuclear nonproliferation for 
material management and minimization, not more than $5.0 
million shall be made available to the Deputy Administrator for 
Naval Reactors for initial planning and early research and 
development of an advanced naval nuclear fuel system based on 
low-enriched uranium.
    In addition, this section would require that, at the same 
time the President submits the fiscal year 2017 budget to 
Congress, the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of the Navy 
shall jointly submit to the congressional defense committees 
their determination as to whether the United States should 
continue to pursue research and development of an advanced 
naval nuclear fuel system based on low-enriched uranium. If the 
Secretaries determine to continue the research and development, 
the Secretaries would be required to ensure the budget request 
for fiscal year 2017 includes funding to carry out the program 
within the defense nuclear nonproliferation, material 
management and minimization budget line.
    Not later than 30 days after the date of the submission of 
such determination, the Deputy Administrator for Naval Reactors 
would be required to submit to the congressional defense 
committees a plan for such research and development, as well as 
ensuring that the budget includes amounts for defense nuclear 
nonproliferation for material management and minimization 
necessary to carry out the plan. This plan would be required to 
include timelines; costs, including an analysis of the cost of 
such research and development as compared to the cost of 
maintaining current navel nuclear reactor technology; 
milestones; identification of any benefits or risks for nuclear 
nonproliferation; identification of any military benefits or 
risks; a discussion of potential security cost savings, 
including for transportation and the relation of cost savings 
to the cost of fuel fabrication; distinguishment between 
requirements for aircraft carriers from submarines; and any 
other matters the Deputy Administrator determines appropriate.
    Finally, this section would require that, if the 
Secretaries determine such research and development should 
continue, not later than 60 days after the date on which the 
Deputy Administrator submits the plan, the Deputy Administrator 
for Naval Reactors would be required to enter into a memorandum 
of understanding with the Deputy Administrator for Defense 
Nuclear Nonproliferation regarding the research and development 
of an advanced naval nuclear fuel system based on low-enriched 
uranium, including with respect to how funding for such 
research and development will be requested for the ``Defense 
Nuclear Nonproliferation'' account for material management and 
minimization and provided to Naval Reactors to carry out the 
program.

            Section 3143--Plutonium Pit Production Capacity

    This section would express the sense of Congress that: (1) 
the requirement to create a modern, responsive nuclear 
infrastructure that includes the capability and capacity to 
produce, at minimum, 50 to 80 pits per year, is a national 
security priority; (2) delaying creation of a modern, 
responsive nuclear infrastructure until the 2030's is an 
unacceptable risk to the nuclear deterrent and the national 
security of the United States; and (3) timelines for creating 
certain capacities for production of plutonium pits and other 
nuclear weapons components must be driven by the requirement to 
hedge against technical and geopolitical risk and not solely by 
the needs of life extension programs.
    This section would also require the Chairman of the Nuclear 
Weapons Council, in consultation with the Administrator for 
Nuclear Security and the Commander, U.S. Strategic Command, to 
provide a briefing to congressional defense committees by March 
1, 2016, on the annual plutonium pit production capacity 
requirement of the nuclear security enterprise. The briefing 
would be required to include a description of the number of 
pits produced that are needed for life extension programs and 
the number of pits produced that are required to support a 
responsive nuclear weapons infrastructure and hedge against 
technical and geopolitical risk.

Section 3144--Analysis of Alternatives for Mobile Guardian Transporter 
                                Program

    This section would require the Administrator for Nuclear 
Security to submit to the congressional defense committees the 
analysis of alternatives conducted by the Administrator for the 
Mobile Guardian Transporter (MGT) program within 60 days after 
the date of the enactment of this Act. The Administrator would 
also be required to enter into a contract with a federally 
funded research and development center to conduct an 
independent assessment of the analysis of alternatives for the 
MGT program. The Administrator would be required to submit a 
report to the congressional defense committees by March 1, 
2016, containing the independent assessment, without change, 
and any views of the Administrator on the assessment or the MGT 
program. Finally, this section would also require the Secretary 
of Energy to include in the annual budget request submission, a 
separate, dedicated program element for the MGT program.
    Materials provided to the committee by the National Nuclear 
Security Administration (NNSA) state that, ``Not only must the 
[MGT] design take into account current technology and 
production costs, it must also have the engineering flexibility 
to serve the nuclear security enterprise for up to 20 years.'' 
The committee believes that, due to the 20 year service life of 
the MGT and the importance of its cargo, the NNSA must conduct 
a rigorous and comprehensive analysis of alternatives to inform 
acquisition decisions. This analysis must consider all safety 
and security scenarios the MGT may encounter as well as the 
costs, benefits, and risks of various engineering and policy 
changes that could affect the program.

  Section 3145--Development of Strategy on Risks to Nonproliferation 
                    Caused by Additive Manufacturing

    This section would require the President to develop and 
pursue a strategy to address the risks to the goals and 
policies of the United States regarding nuclear 
nonproliferation caused by the increased use of additive 
manufacture technology (including 3D Printing). This section 
would require the President to brief the appropriate 
congressional committees on the development and execution of 
such strategy not later than March 31, 2016, and every 120 days 
thereafter until January 1, 2019. Finally, this section would 
highlight the importance of pursuing such strategy at the 
Nuclear Security Summit in Chicago in 2016.

          TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

                                OVERVIEW

    The budget request contained $29.2 million for the Defense 
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board for fiscal year 2016. The 
committee recommends $29.2 million, the amount of the budget 
request.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                      Section 3201--Authorization

    This section would authorize funds for the Defense Nuclear 
Facilities Safety Board for fiscal year 2016.

Section 3202--Administration of Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

    This section would amend section 311(c) of the Atomic 
Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2886(c)) to clarify that, in 
carrying out certain duties, the Chairman of the Defense 
Nuclear Facilities Board may not withhold from any member of 
the Board any information that is made available to the 
Chairman regarding the Board's functions, powers, and mission 
(including with respect to the management and evaluation of 
employees of the Board). This section would further amend 
section 311(c) to clarify that the Chairman of the Board, 
subject to the approval of the Board, may appoint and remove 
particular senior employees of the Board: (1) the senior 
employee responsible for budgetary and general administration 
matters; (2) the general counsel; and (3) the senior employee 
responsible for technical matters.

                 TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


             Section 3401--Authorization of Appropriations

    This section would authorize $17.5 million for fiscal year 
2016 for operation and maintenance of the Naval Petroleum 
Reserves.

                  TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                       Merchant Mariner Workforce

    The committee notes that the number of United States 
merchant mariners has declined in recent years. This is in 
large part due to the decline in the number of United States 
flagged merchant vessels. The committee is concerned that there 
may not be enough qualified merchant mariners to meet the 
demands of the Department of Defense should it ever need to 
activate the Ready Reserve fleet of the United States Navy. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Maritime Administrator, in 
coordination with the Secretary of the Navy, to provide a 
comprehensive report to the congressional defense committees by 
September 30, 2015 on the status of the merchant mariner 
workforce and whether there are sufficient merchant mariners to 
meet the Navy's surge fleet requirements in the event of a 
national emergency. If they conclude there are insufficient 
mariners, it should analyze options for correcting the problem 
and take into account U.S. national security interests, U.S. 
commercial shipping interests, and budgetary implications.

                 National Security Multi-Mission Vessel

    The committee understands that the existing six State 
Maritime Academies are vital maritime training and education 
assets that provide unique maritime learning opportunities. The 
State Maritime Academies produce annually two-thirds of the 
total of trained, Coast Guard-credentialed officers for service 
in the United States Merchant Marine, thus ensuring a cadre of 
well-educated and trained merchant mariners in the event of a 
national emergency or contingency. Because United States 
Merchant Marine credentialed officers remain vital to ensure 
the economic and national security of the United States, State 
Maritime Academies remain valuable partners with the Department 
of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, and other 
Federal agencies. However, the quality of maritime training 
available at State Maritime Academies is limited by the 
advanced age of State Maritime Academy training ships, which 
reduce available days at sea, increase annual maintenance 
costs, and create other obstacles to ensuring such vessels 
fully comply with international and domestic maritime statutes, 
rules, and regulations. Recapitalizing the State Maritime 
Academy training fleet would improve mariner education, reduce 
operational risks and annual operation and maintenance costs, 
and ensure that State Maritime Academies have modern and 
reliable training platforms for the future. A national security 
multi-mission ship would maximize mariner training 
opportunities for cadets and midshipmen while providing a 
flexible platform suitable and available for national security, 
emergency, or humanitarian response or meeting other 
contingencies.
    The committee supports the planning and design investment 
for the development of a new class of National Security Multi-
Mission Training Vessels for use by State Maritime Academies 
and for deployment in support of Federal agency security or 
emergency missions. The ships designed under this process will 
provide a modern, functional, environmentally compliant 
maritime training platform and will be capable of deployments 
in support of homeland and national security missions, natural 
disasters, emergencies, and humanitarian missions.
    The committee encourages the Department of Transportation 
to continue budgeting for the design and construction of a 
National Security Multi-Mission Vessel in order to recapitalize 
the aging fleet of State Maritime Academy training vessels.

                         Small Shipyard Grants

    The committee notes the need for continued investment in 
small shipyards, taking advantage of existing grant programs, 
to sustain the ship repair and shipbuilding industries. The 
committee also notes that many of these shipyards are in need 
of repair and upgrade after being used extensively in operating 
environments of the past decade. Furthermore, the committee 
notes that many small businesses ancillary to public shipyards 
have invested in maritime research and development and have 
multiyear track records conducting ship repair operations. 
Therefore, the committee encourages the Secretary of Defense 
and the Administrator of the Maritime Administration to use 
existing programs, like the Assistance to Small Shipyards Grant 
program, to fund infrastructure upgrades in small shipyards.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


  Section 3501--Authorization of Appropriations for National Security 
          Aspects of the Merchant Marine for Fiscal Year 2016

    This section would authorize appropriations for the 
national security aspects of the merchant marine for fiscal 
year 2016.

   Section 3502--Sense of Congress Regarding Maritime Security Fleet 
                                Program

    This section would express the sense of Congress that 
dedicated and enhanced support is necessary to stabilize and 
preserve the Maritime Security Fleet program.
    The committee notes that declines in the U.S.-flag 
international fleet have diminished the pool of U.S. civilian 
mariners critical to crewing not only commercial U.S.-flag 
vessels but also national defense surge sealift. The drop in 
the number of U.S.-flag vessels in the international trades is 
in part a result of reductions in government-impelled cargoes, 
both Department of Defense cargoes and food aid cargoes. The 
committee is concerned that future reductions in U.S.-flag 
commercial vessels, especially militarily useful vessels in the 
Maritime Security Program, could put at risk the Nation's 
ability to fully activate, deploy, and sustain Armed Forces 
around the globe.

 Section 3503--Update of References to the Secretary of Transportation 
         Regarding Unemployment Insurance and Vessel Operators

    This section would update sections 3305 and 3306(n) of 
title 26, United States Code, to reflect the Maritime 
Administration's transfer from the Department of Commerce to 
the Department of Transportation that occurred in 1981.

  Section 3504--Reliance on Classification Society Certification for 
         Purposes of Eligibility for Certificate of Inspection

    This section would modify section 53102 of title 46, United 
States Code, and require the U.S. Coast Guard to implement 
certain class society certification standards.

                       DIVISION D--FUNDING TABLES

        Section 4001--Authorization of Amounts in Funding Tables

    This section 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 
guidance in accordance with established procedures.
    Consistent with the previously expressed views of the 
committee, this section would also require that a decision by 
an Agency Head to commit, obligate, or expend funds to a 
specific entity on the basis of such funding tables be based on 
merit-based selection procedures in accordance with the 
requirements of section 2304(k) and section 2374 of title 10, 
United States Code, and other applicable provisions of law.

                         SUMMARY OF NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016
                                            (In Thousands of Dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       House          House
                                                                   FY 2016 Request     Change       Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE
 
                                         National Defense Funding, Base
 
                                  Function 051, Department of Defense-Military
 
Division A: Department of Defense Authorizations
 
Title I--Procurement
Aircraft Procurement, Army.......................................       5,689,357       179,800       5,869,157
Missile Procurement, Army........................................       1,419,957        76,000       1,495,957
Weapons & Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army..........................       1,887,073       148,617       2,035,690
Procurement of Ammunition, Army..................................       1,233,378       -11,000       1,222,378
Other Procurement, Army..........................................       5,899,028       -91,000       5,808,028
Aircraft Procurement, Navy.......................................      16,126,405     2,214,100      18,340,505
Weapons Procurement, Navy........................................       3,154,154        77,800       3,231,954
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy & Marine Corps...................         723,741                       723,741
Shipbuilding & Conversion, Navy..................................      16,597,457      -327,190      16,270,267
Other Procurement, Navy..........................................       6,614,715       111,500       6,726,215
Procurement, Marine Corps........................................       1,131,418        37,500       1,168,918
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force..................................      15,657,769       290,500      15,948,269
Missile Procurement, Air Force...................................       2,987,045                     2,987,045
Space Procurement, Air Force.....................................       2,584,061        26,000       2,610,061
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force.............................       1,758,843       -20,000       1,738,843
Other Procurement, Air Force.....................................      18,272,438        22,900      18,295,338
Procurement, Defense-Wide........................................       5,130,853       132,480       5,263,333
Joint Urgent Operational Needs Fund..............................          99,701       -99,701               0
Subtotal, Title I--Procurement...................................     106,967,393     2,768,306     109,735,699
 
Title II--Research, Development, Test and Evaluation
Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Army...................       6,919,178       105,500       7,024,678
Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Navy...................      17,885,916    -1,233,693      16,652,223
Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Air Force..............      26,473,669      -515,700      25,957,969
Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Defense-Wide...........      18,329,861       217,220      18,547,081
Operational Test & Evaluation, Defense...........................         170,558                       170,558
Subtotal, Title II--Research, Development, Test and Evaluation...      69,779,182    -1,426,673      68,352,509
 
Title III--Operation and Maintenance
Operation & Maintenance, Army....................................      23,822,655       -58,310      23,764,345
Operation & Maintenance, Army Reserve............................       1,035,017         6,000       1,041,017
Operation & Maintenance, Army National Guard.....................       3,576,169       513,990       4,090,159
Operation & Maintenance, Navy....................................      32,430,364      -828,900      31,601,464
Operation & Maintenance, Marine Corps............................       4,595,074      -325,200       4,269,874
Operation & Maintenance, Navy Reserve............................         819,847         4,500         824,347
Operation & Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve....................         276,112           400         276,512
Operation & Maintenance, Air Force...............................      31,317,486      -426,530      30,890,956
Operation & Maintenance, Air Force Reserve.......................       2,817,743       -98,200       2,719,543
Operation & Maintenance, Air National Guard......................       6,956,210       -60,600       6,895,610
Operation & Maintenance, Defense-Wide............................      30,480,285      -391,600      30,088,685
Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster and Civic Aid....................         100,266                       100,266
Subtotal, Title III--Operation and Maintenance...................     138,227,228    -1,664,450     136,562,778
 
Title IV--Military Personnel
Military Personnel Appropriations................................     130,491,227      -291,492     130,199,735
Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Fund Contributions..............       6,243,449                     6,243,449
Subtotal, Title IV--Military Personnel...........................     136,734,676      -291,492     136,443,184
 
Title XIV--Other Authorizations
Working Capital Fund, Army.......................................          50,432         5,000          55,432
Working Capital Fund, Navy.......................................               0         5,000           5,000
Working Capital Fund, Air Force..................................          62,898         5,000          67,898
Working Capital Fund, Defense-Wide...............................          45,084                        45,084
Working Capital Fund, DECA.......................................       1,154,154       322,000       1,476,154
National Defense Sealift Fund....................................         474,164       674,190       1,148,354
National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund...............................               0     1,390,693       1,390,693
Chemical Agents & Munitions Destruction..........................         720,721                       720,721
Drug Interdiction and Counter Drug Activities....................         850,598        50,000         900,598
Office of the Inspector General..................................         316,159        -1,000         315,159
Defense Health Program...........................................      32,243,328      -508,000      31,735,328
Subtotal, Title XIV--Other Authorizations........................      35,917,538     1,942,883      37,860,421
 
Total, Division A: Department of Defense Authorizations..........     487,626,017     1,328,574     488,954,591
 
Division B: Military Construction Authorizations
 
Military Construction
Army.............................................................         743,245       -80,000         663,245
Navy.............................................................       1,605,929      -244,004       1,361,925
Air Force........................................................       1,354,785       -75,000       1,279,785
Defense-Wide.....................................................       2,300,767      -360,888       1,939,879
NATO Security Investment Program.................................         120,000        30,000         150,000
Army National Guard..............................................         197,237       -29,800         167,437
Army Reserve.....................................................         113,595        -9,300         104,295
Navy and Marine Corps Reserve....................................          36,078                        36,078
Air National Guard...............................................         123,538                       123,538
Air Force Reserve................................................          46,821                        46,821
Subtotal, Military Construction..................................       6,641,995      -768,992       5,873,003
 
Family Housing
Construction, Army...............................................          99,695                        99,695
Operation & Maintenance, Army....................................         393,511                       393,511
Construction, Navy and Marine Corps..............................          16,541                        16,541
Operation & Maintenance, Navy and Marine Corps...................         353,036                       353,036
Construction, Air Force..........................................         160,498                       160,498
Operation & Maintenance, Air Force...............................         331,232                       331,232
Operation & Maintenance, Defense-Wide............................          58,668                        58,668
Subtotal, Family Housing.........................................       1,413,181             0       1,413,181
 
Base Realignment and Closure
Base Realignment and Closure--Army...............................          29,691                        29,691
Base Realignment and Closure--Navy...............................         157,088                       157,088
Base Realignment and Closure--Air Force..........................          64,555                        64,555
Subtotal, Base Realignment and Closure...........................         251,334             0         251,334
 
Undistributed Adjustments
Prior Year Savings...............................................               0      -386,518        -386,518
Subtotal, Undistributed Adjustments..............................               0      -386,518        -386,518
 
Total, Division B: Military Construction Authorizations..........       8,306,510    -1,155,510       7,151,000
 
Total, 051, Department of Defense-Military.......................     495,932,527       173,064     496,105,591
 
                                 Function 053, Atomic Energy Defense Activities
 
Division C: Department of Energy National Security Authorization and Other Authorizations
 
Environmental and Other Defense Activities
Nuclear Energy...................................................         135,161                       135,161
Weapons Activities...............................................       8,846,948       237,700       9,084,648
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation.................................       1,940,302       -39,000       1,901,302
Naval Reactors...................................................       1,375,496        12,000       1,387,496
Federal salaries and expenses....................................         402,654        -6,000         396,654
Defense Environmental Cleanup....................................       5,527,347      -384,197       5,143,150
Other Defense Activities.........................................         774,425         4,200         778,625
Subtotal, Environmental and Other Defense Activities.............      19,002,333      -175,297      18,827,036
 
Independent Federal Agency Authorization
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board..........................          29,150                        29,150
Subtotal, Independent Federal Agency Authorization...............          29,150             0          29,150
 
Subtotal, Division C: Department of Energy National Security           19,031,483      -175,297      18,856,186
 Authorization and Other Authorizations..........................
 
Subtotal, 053, Atomic Energy Defense Activities..................      19,031,483      -175,297      18,856,186
 
Total, National Defense Funding, Base............................     514,964,010        -2,233     514,961,777
 
 
            National Defense Funding, Overseas Contingency Operations and Additional Authorizations
 
                            National Defense Funding, Overseas Contingency Operations
 
                                  Function 051, Department of Defense-Military
 
Procurement
Aircraft Procurement, Army.......................................         164,987                       164,987
Missile Procurement, Army........................................          37,260                        37,260
Weapons & Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army..........................          26,030                        26,030
Procurement of Ammunition, Army..................................         192,040                       192,040
Other Procurement, Army..........................................       1,205,596                     1,205,596
Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund....................         493,271       -50,700         442,571
Aircraft Procurement, Navy.......................................         217,394                       217,394
Weapons Procurement, Navy........................................           3,344                         3,344
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy & Marine Corps...................         136,930                       136,930
Other Procurement, Navy..........................................          12,186                        12,186
Procurement, Marine Corps........................................          48,934                        48,934
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force..................................         128,900                       128,900
Missile Procurement, Air Force...................................         289,142                       289,142
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force.............................         228,874                       228,874
Other Procurement, Air Force.....................................       3,859,964                     3,859,964
Procurement, Defense-Wide........................................         212,418                       212,418
National Guard & Reserve Equipment...............................               0       250,000         250,000
Subtotal, Procurement............................................       7,257,270       199,300       7,456,570
 
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation
Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Army...................           1,500                         1,500
Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Navy...................          35,747                        35,747
Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Air Force..............          17,100                        17,100
Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Defense-Wide...........         137,087        25,000         162,087
Subtotal, Research, Development, Test and Evaluation.............         191,434        25,000         216,434
 
Operation and Maintenance
Operation & Maintenance, Army....................................      11,382,750       120,800      11,503,550
Operation & Maintenance, Army Reserve............................          24,559                        24,559
Operation & Maintenance, Army National Guard.....................          60,845                        60,845
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund.................................       3,762,257       337,743       4,100,000
Iraq Train & Equip Fund..........................................         715,000                       715,000
Syria Train & Equip Fund.........................................         600,000       -68,550         531,450
Operation & Maintenance, Navy....................................       5,131,588                     5,131,588
Operation & Maintenance, Marine Corps............................         952,534                       952,534
Operation & Maintenance, Navy Reserve............................          31,643                        31,643
Operation & Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve....................           3,455                         3,455
Operation & Maintenance, Air Force...............................       9,090,013       659,250       9,749,263
Operation & Maintenance, Air Force Reserve.......................          58,106                        58,106
Operation & Maintenance, Air National Guard......................          19,900                        19,900
Operation & Maintenance, Defense-Wide............................       5,805,633       294,000       6,099,633
Counterterrorism Partnerships Fund...............................       2,100,000    -2,100,000               0
Subtotal, Operation and Maintenance..............................      39,738,283      -756,757      38,981,526
 
Military Personnel
Military Personnel Appropriations................................       3,204,758                     3,204,758
Subtotal, Military Personnel.....................................       3,204,758             0       3,204,758
 
Other Authorizations
Working Capital Fund, Air Force..................................           2,500                         2,500
Working Capital Fund, Defense-Wide...............................          86,350                        86,350
Drug Interdiction and Counter Drug Activities....................         186,000                       186,000
Office of the Inspector General..................................          10,262                        10,262
Defense Health Program...........................................         272,704                       272,704
Subtotal, Other Authorizations...................................         557,816             0         557,816
 
Military Construction
Army.............................................................               0        76,000          76,000
Navy.............................................................               0       244,004         244,004
Air Force........................................................               0        75,000          75,000
Defense-Wide.....................................................               0       136,996         136,996
Subtotal, Military Construction..................................               0       532,000         532,000
 
Subtotal, Overseas Contingency Operations........................      50,949,561          -457      50,949,104
 
Subtotal, 051, Department of Defense-Military....................      50,949,561          -457      50,949,104
 
Total, National Defense Funding, Overseas Contingency Operations.      50,949,561          -457      50,949,104
 
                               National Defense Funding, Additional Authorizations
 
                                  Function 051, Department of Defense-Military
 
Operation and Maintenance
Operation & Maintenance, Army....................................      11,284,891                    11,284,891
Operation & Maintenance, Army Reserve............................       1,630,775                     1,630,775
Operation & Maintenance, Army National Guard.....................       3,141,808                     3,141,808
Operation & Maintenance, Navy....................................       9,770,392                     9,770,392
Operation & Maintenance, Marine Corps............................       1,633,708                     1,633,708
Operation & Maintenance, Navy Reserve............................         181,911                       181,911
Operation & Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve....................             924                           924
Operation & Maintenance, Air Force...............................       6,874,443                     6,874,443
Operation & Maintenance, Air Force Reserve.......................         246,514                       246,514
Operation & Maintenance, Defense-Wide............................       1,960,558                     1,960,558
US Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, Defense................          14,078                        14,078
Cooperative Threat Reduction.....................................         358,496                       358,496
Defense Acquisition Development Workforce Fund...................          84,140                        84,140
Environmental Restoration, Army..................................         234,829                       234,829
Environmental Restoration, Navy..................................         292,453                       292,453
Environmental Restoration, Air Force.............................         368,131                       368,131
Environmental Restoration, Defense...............................           8,232                         8,232
Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Sites...................         203,717                       203,717
Subtotal, Operation and Maintenance..............................      38,290,000             0      38,290,000
 
Subtotal, Additional Authorizations..............................      38,290,000             0      38,290,000
 
Subtotal, 051, Department of Defense-Military....................      38,290,000             0      38,290,000
 
Total, National Defense Funding, Additional Authorizations.......      38,290,000             0      38,290,000
 
Total, National Defense Funding, Overseas Contingency Operations       89,239,561          -457      89,239,104
 and Additional Authorizations ..................................
 
Total, National Defense..........................................     604,203,571        -2,690     604,200,881
 
MEMORANDUM: BASE BUDGET REQUIREMENTS
Base Funding.....................................................     514,964,010        -2,233     514,961,777
Additional Authorizations........................................      38,290,000             0      38,290,000
     Total, Base Budget Requirements.............................     553,254,010        -2,233     553,251,777
 
MEMORANDUM: NON-DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
Title XIV--Armed Forces Retirement Home (Function 600)...........          64,300                        64,300
Title XIV--Cemeterial Expenses, Army (Function 700)..............          70,800                        70,800
Title XXXIV--Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves (Function              17,500                        17,500
 270)............................................................
Title XXXV--Maritime Administration (Function 400)...............         184,637                       184,637
 
MEMORANDUM: TRANSFER AUTHORITIES (NON-ADD)
Title X--General Transfer Authority..............................      [5,000,000]                   [5,000,000]
Title XV--Special Transfer Authority.............................      [3,500,000]                   [3,500,000]
 
MEMORANDUM: DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS NOT UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE (NON-ADD)
Defense Production Act...........................................         [46,680]                      [46,680]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


              NATIONAL DEFENSE BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION
                        (In Thousands of Dollars)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    FY 2016       House         House
                                    Request       Change     Authorized
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
  Summary, Discretionary Authorizations Within the Jurisdiction of the
                        Armed Services Committee
SUBTOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE   495,932,527      173,064   496,105,591
 (051).........................
SUBTOTAL, ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE    19,031,483     -175,297    18,856,186
 PROGRAMS (053)................
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE (050)--   514,964,010       -2,233   514,961,777
 BASE BILL.....................
TOTAL, OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY        89,239,561         -457    89,239,104
 OPERATIONS....................
GRAND TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE..   604,203,571       -2,690   604,200,881
 
    Base National Defense Discretionary Programs that are Not In the
                              Jurisdiction
      of the Armed Services Committee or Do Not Require Additional
                              Authorization
Defense Production Act                 25,000                     25,000
 Purchases.....................
Indefinite Account: Disposal Of         8,000                      8,000
 DOD Real Property.............
Indefinite Account: Lease Of           33,000                     33,000
 DOD Real Property.............
Subtotal, Budget Sub-Function          66,000                     66,000
 051...........................
 
Formerly Utilized Sites               104,000                    104,000
 Remedial Action Program.......
Subtotal, Budget Sub-Function         104,000                    104,000
 053...........................
 
Other Discretionary Programs...     7,566,000                  7,566,000
Subtotal, Budget Sub-Function       7,566,000                  7,566,000
 054...........................
Total Defense Discretionary         7,736,000                  7,736,000
 Adjustments (050).............
 
Budget Authority Implication, National Defense Discretionary
Department of Defense--Military   585,238,088      172,607   585,410,695
 (051).........................
Atomic Energy Defense              19,135,483     -175,297    18,960,186
 Activities (053)..............
Defense-Related Activities          7,566,000                  7,566,000
 (054).........................
Total BA Implication, National    611,939,571       -2,690   611,936,881
 Defense Discretionary.........
 
National Defense Mandatory Programs, Current Law (CBO Baseline)
Concurrent receipt accrual          6,932,000                  6,932,000
 payments to the Military
 Retirement Fund...............
Revolving, trust and other DOD      1,135,000                  1,135,000
 Mandatory.....................
Offsetting receipts............    -1,593,000                 -1,593,000
Subtotal, Budget Sub-Function       6,474,000                  6,474,000
 051...........................
Energy employees occupational       1,168,000                  1,168,000
 illness compensation programs
 and other.....................
Subtotal, Budget Sub-Function       1,168,000                  1,168,000
 053...........................
Radiation exposure compensation        59,000                     59,000
 trust fund....................
Payment to CIA retirement fund        514,000                    514,000
 and other.....................
Subtotal, Budget Sub-Function         573,000                    573,000
 054...........................
Total National Defense              8,215,000                  8,215,000
 Mandatory (050)...............
 
Budget Authority Implication, National Defense Discretionary and
 Mandatory
Department of Defense--Military   591,712,088      172,607   591,884,695
 (051).........................
Atomic Energy Defense              20,303,483     -175,297    20,128,186
 Activities (053)..............
Defense-Related Activities          8,139,000                  8,139,000
 (054).........................
Total BA Implication, National    620,154,571       -2,690   620,151,881
 Defense Discretionary and
 Mandatory.....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------


TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT
 


SEC. 4101. PROCUREMENT.
 


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                SEC. 4101. PROCUREMENT  (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     FY 2016 Request              House Change              House Authorized
     Line            Item      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Qty          Cost          Qty           Cost          Qty          Cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               AIRCRAFT
                PROCUREMENT,
                ARMY
               FIXED WING
002            UTILITY F/W                            879                                                    879
                AIRCRAFT.
004            MQ-1 UAV.......         15         260,436                     17,000          15         277,436
                   Extended                                                  [17,000]
                   Range
                   Modificatio
                   ns.
               ROTARY
006            HELICOPTER,             28         187,177                                     28         187,177
                LIGHT UTILITY
                (LUH).
007            AH-64 APACHE            64       1,168,461                                     64       1,168,461
                BLOCK IIIA
                REMAN.
008               ADVANCE                         209,930                                                209,930
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
011            UH-60 BLACKHAWK         94       1,435,945          8         128,000         102       1,563,945
                M MODEL (MYP).
                   Additional                                    [8]        [128,000]
                   8
                   rotorcraft
                   for Army
                   National
                   Guard.
012               ADVANCE                         127,079                                                127,079
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
013            UH-60 BLACK             40          46,641          8           8,800          48          55,441
                HAWK A AND L
                MODELS.
                   Additional                                    [8]          [8,800]
                   8
                   rotorcraft
                   for Army
                   National
                   Guard.
014            CH-47                   39       1,024,587                                     39       1,024,587
                HELICOPTER.
015               ADVANCE                          99,344                                                 99,344
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
               MODIFICATION OF
                AIRCRAFT
016            MQ-1 PAYLOAD                        97,543                                                 97,543
                (MIP).
019            MULTI SENSOR                        95,725                                                 95,725
                ABN RECON
                (MIP).
020            AH-64 MODS.....                    116,153                                                116,153
021            CH-47 CARGO                         86,330                                                 86,330
                HELICOPTER
                MODS (MYP).
022            GRCS SEMA MODS                       4,019                                                  4,019
                (MIP).
023            ARL SEMA MODS                       16,302                                                 16,302
                (MIP).
024            EMARSS SEMA                         13,669                                                 13,669
                MODS (MIP).
025            UTILITY/CARGO                       16,166                                                 16,166
                AIRPLANE MODS.
026            UTILITY                             13,793                                                 13,793
                HELICOPTER
                MODS.
028            NETWORK AND                        112,807                                                112,807
                MISSION PLAN.
029            COMMS, NAV                          82,904                                                 82,904
                SURVEILLANCE.
030            GATM ROLLUP....                     33,890                                                 33,890
031            RQ-7 UAV MODS..                     81,444                                                 81,444
               GROUND SUPPORT
                AVIONICS
032            AIRCRAFT                            56,215                                                 56,215
                SURVIVABILITY
                EQUIPMENT.
033            SURVIVABILITY                        8,917                                                  8,917
                CM.
034            CMWS...........                     78,348                     26,000                     104,348
                   Apache                                                    [26,000]
                   Survivabili
                   ty
                   Enhancement
                   s--Army
                   Unfunded
                   Requirement.
               OTHER SUPPORT
035            AVIONICS                             6,937                                                  6,937
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
036            COMMON GROUND                       64,867                                                 64,867
                EQUIPMENT.
037            AIRCREW                             44,085                                                 44,085
                INTEGRATED
                SYSTEMS.
038            AIR TRAFFIC                         94,545                                                 94,545
                CONTROL.
039            INDUSTRIAL                           1,207                                                  1,207
                FACILITIES.
040            LAUNCHER, 2.75                       3,012                                                  3,012
                ROCKET.
                    TOTAL             280       5,689,357         16         179,800         296       5,869,157
                    AIRCRAFT
                    PROCUREMEN
                    T, ARMY.
 
               MISSILE
                PROCUREMENT,
                ARMY
               SURFACE-TO-AIR
                MISSILE SYSTEM
001            LOWER TIER AIR                     115,075                                                115,075
                AND MISSILE
                DEFENSE (AMD).
002            MSE MISSILE....         80         414,946                                     80         414,946
               AIR-TO-SURFACE
                MISSILE SYSTEM
003            HELLFIRE SYS           113          27,975                                    113          27,975
                SUMMARY.
004               ADVANCE                          27,738                                                 27,738
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
               ANTI-TANK/
                ASSAULT
                MISSILE SYS
005            JAVELIN (AAWS-         331          77,163        519          91,000         850         168,163
                M) SYSTEM
                SUMMARY.
                   Program                                     [519]         [91,000]
                   increase to
                   support
                   Unfunded
                   Requirement
                   s.
006            TOW 2 SYSTEM         1,704          87,525                                  1,704          87,525
                SUMMARY.
008            GUIDED MLRS          1,668         251,060                                  1,668         251,060
                ROCKET (GMLRS).
009            MLRS REDUCED         3,121          17,428                                  3,121          17,428
                RANGE PRACTICE
                ROCKETS (RRPR).
               MODIFICATIONS
011            PATRIOT MODS...                    241,883                                                241,883
012            ATACMS MODS....                     30,119                    -15,000                      15,119
                   Early to                                                 [-15,000]
                   need.
013            GMLRS MOD......                     18,221                                                 18,221
014            STINGER MODS...                      2,216                                                  2,216
015            AVENGER MODS...                      6,171                                                  6,171
016            ITAS/TOW MODS..                     19,576                                                 19,576
017            MLRS MODS......                     35,970                                                 35,970
018            HIMARS                               3,148                                                  3,148
                MODIFICATIONS.
               SPARES AND
                REPAIR PARTS
019            SPARES AND                          33,778                                                 33,778
                REPAIR PARTS.
               SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT &
                FACILITIES
020            AIR DEFENSE                          3,717                                                  3,717
                TARGETS.
021            ITEMS LESS THAN                      1,544                                                  1,544
                $5.0M
                (MISSILES).
022            PRODUCTION BASE                      4,704                                                  4,704
                SUPPORT.
                    TOTAL           7,017       1,419,957        519          76,000       7,536       1,495,957
                    MISSILE
                    PROCUREMEN
                    T, ARMY.
 
               PROCUREMENT OF
                W&TCV, ARMY
               TRACKED COMBAT
                VEHICLES
001            STRYKER VEHICLE                    181,245                                                181,245
               MODIFICATION OF
                TRACKED COMBAT
                VEHICLES
002            STRYKER (MOD)..                     74,085                     44,500                     118,585
                   Lethality                                                 [44,500]
                   Upgrades.
003            STRYKER UPGRADE         62         305,743                                     62         305,743
005            BRADLEY PROGRAM                    225,042                                                225,042
                (MOD).
006            HOWITZER, MED                       60,079                                                 60,079
                SP FT 155MM
                M109A6 (MOD).
007            PALADIN                 30         273,850                                     30         273,850
                INTEGRATED
                MANAGEMENT
                (PIM).
008            IMPROVED                31         123,629                     72,000          31         195,629
                RECOVERY
                VEHICLE (M88A2
                HERCULES).
                   Additional                                                [72,000]
                   Vehicles -
                   Army
                   Unfunded
                   Requirement.
009            ASSAULT BRIDGE                       2,461                                                  2,461
                (MOD).
010            ASSAULT                              2,975                                                  2,975
                BREACHER
                VEHICLE.
011            M88 FOV MODS...                     14,878                                                 14,878
012            JOINT ASSAULT            4          33,455                                      4          33,455
                BRIDGE.
013            M1 ABRAMS TANK                     367,939                     40,000                     407,939
                (MOD).
                   Program                                                   [40,000]
                   Increase.
               SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT &
                FACILITIES
015            PRODUCTION BASE                      6,479                                                  6,479
                SUPPORT (TCV-
                WTCV).
               WEAPONS & OTHER
                COMBAT
                VEHICLES
016            MORTAR SYSTEMS.                      4,991                                                  4,991
017            XM320 GRENADE                       26,294                                                 26,294
                LAUNCHER
                MODULE (GLM).
018            PRECISION                            1,984                     -1,984                           0
                SNIPER RIFLE.
                   Army                                                      [-1,984]
                   request -
                   schedule
                   delay.
019            COMPACT SEMI-                        1,488                     -1,488                           0
                AUTOMATIC
                SNIPER SYSTEM.
                   Army                                                      [-1,488]
                   request -
                   schedule
                   delay.
020            CARBINE........                     34,460                                                 34,460
021            COMMON REMOTELY                      8,367                                                  8,367
                OPERATED
                WEAPONS
                STATION.
022            HANDGUN........                      5,417                     -5,417                           0
                   Army                                                      [-5,417]
                   request -
                   early to
                   need and
                   schedule
                   delay.
               MOD OF WEAPONS
                AND OTHER
                COMBAT VEH
023            MK-19 GRENADE                        2,777                                                  2,777
                MACHINE GUN
                MODS.
024            M777 MODS......                     10,070                                                 10,070
025            M4 CARBINE MODS                     27,566                                                 27,566
026            M2 50 CAL                           44,004                                                 44,004
                MACHINE GUN
                MODS.
027            M249 SAW                             1,190                                                  1,190
                MACHINE GUN
                MODS.
028            M240 MEDIUM                          1,424                                                  1,424
                MACHINE GUN
                MODS.
029            SNIPER RIFLES                        2,431                     -1,451                         980
                MODIFICATIONS.
                   Army                                                      [-1,451]
                   request -
                   schedule
                   delay.
030            M119                                20,599                                                 20,599
                MODIFICATIONS.
032            MORTAR                               6,300                                                  6,300
                MODIFICATION.
033            MODIFICATIONS                        3,737                                                  3,737
                LESS THAN
                $5.0M (WOCV-
                WTCV).
               SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT &
                FACILITIES
034            ITEMS LESS THAN                        391                                                    391
                $5.0M (WOCV-
                WTCV).
035            PRODUCTION BASE                      9,027                      2,457                      11,484
                SUPPORT (WOCV-
                WTCV).
                   Army                                                       [2,457]
                   requested
                   realignment.
036            INDUSTRIAL                             304                                                    304
                PREPAREDNESS.
037            SMALL ARMS                           2,392                                                  2,392
                EQUIPMENT
                (SOLDIER ENH
                PROG).
                    TOTAL             127       1,887,073                    148,617         127       2,035,690
                    PROCUREMEN
                    T OF
                    W&TCV,
                    ARMY.
 
               PROCUREMENT OF
                AMMUNITION,
                ARMY
               SMALL/MEDIUM
                CAL AMMUNITION
001            CTG, 5.56MM,                        43,489                                                 43,489
                ALL TYPES.
002            CTG, 7.62MM,                        40,715                                                 40,715
                ALL TYPES.
003            CTG, HANDGUN,                        7,753                     -1,000                       6,753
                ALL TYPES.
                   Army                                                      [-1,000]
                   request -
                   program
                   reduction.
004            CTG, .50 CAL,                       24,728                                                 24,728
                ALL TYPES.
005            CTG, 25MM, ALL                       8,305                                                  8,305
                TYPES.
006            CTG, 30MM, ALL                      34,330                                                 34,330
                TYPES.
007            CTG, 40MM, ALL                      79,972                    -10,000                      69,972
                TYPES.
                   Program                                                  [-10,000]
                   reduction.
               MORTAR
                AMMUNITION
008            60MM MORTAR,                        42,898                                                 42,898
                ALL TYPES.
009            81MM MORTAR,                        43,500                                                 43,500
                ALL TYPES.
010            120MM MORTAR,                       64,372                                                 64,372
                ALL TYPES.
               TANK AMMUNITION
011            CARTRIDGES,                        105,541                                                105,541
                TANK, 105MM
                AND 120MM, ALL
                TYPES.
               ARTILLERY
                AMMUNITION
012            ARTILLERY                           57,756                                                 57,756
                CARTRIDGES,
                75MM & 105MM,
                ALL TYPES.
013            ARTILLERY                           77,995                                                 77,995
                PROJECTILE,
                155MM, ALL
                TYPES.
014            PROJ 155MM                          45,518                                                 45,518
                EXTENDED RANGE
                M982.
015            ARTILLERY                           78,024                                                 78,024
                PROPELLANTS,
                FUZES AND
                PRIMERS, ALL.
               ROCKETS
016            SHOULDER                             7,500                                                  7,500
                LAUNCHED
                MUNITIONS, ALL
                TYPES.
017            ROCKET, HYDRA                       33,653                                                 33,653
                70, ALL TYPES.
               OTHER
                AMMUNITION
018            CAD/PAD, ALL                         5,639                                                  5,639
                TYPES.
019            DEMOLITION                           9,751                                                  9,751
                MUNITIONS, ALL
                TYPES.
020            GRENADES, ALL                       19,993                                                 19,993
                TYPES.
021            SIGNALS, ALL                         9,761                                                  9,761
                TYPES.
022            SIMULATORS, ALL                      9,749                                                  9,749
                TYPES.
               MISCELLANEOUS
023            AMMO                                 3,521                                                  3,521
                COMPONENTS,
                ALL TYPES.
024            NON-LETHAL                           1,700                                                  1,700
                AMMUNITION,
                ALL TYPES.
025            ITEMS LESS THAN                      6,181                                                  6,181
                $5 MILLION
                (AMMO).
026            AMMUNITION                          17,811                                                 17,811
                PECULIAR
                EQUIPMENT.
027            FIRST                               14,695                                                 14,695
                DESTINATION
                TRANSPORTATION
                (AMMO).
               PRODUCTION BASE
                SUPPORT
029            PROVISION OF                       221,703                                                221,703
                INDUSTRIAL
                FACILITIES.
030            CONVENTIONAL                       113,250                                                113,250
                MUNITIONS
                DEMILITARIZATI
                ON.
031            ARMS INITIATIVE                      3,575                                                  3,575
                    TOTAL                       1,233,378                    -11,000                   1,222,378
                    PROCUREMEN
                    T OF
                    AMMUNITION
                    , ARMY.
 
               OTHER
                PROCUREMENT,
                ARMY
               TACTICAL
                VEHICLES
001            TACTICAL                            12,855                                                 12,855
                TRAILERS/DOLLY
                SETS.
002            SEMITRAILERS,                           53                                                     53
                FLATBED:.
004            JOINT LIGHT            450         308,336                                    450         308,336
                TACTICAL
                VEHICLE.
005            FAMILY OF              166          90,040                                    166          90,040
                MEDIUM
                TACTICAL VEH
                (FMTV).
006            FIRETRUCKS &                         8,444                                                  8,444
                ASSOCIATED
                FIREFIGHTING
                EQUIP.
007            FAMILY OF HEAVY        273          27,549                                    273          27,549
                TACTICAL
                VEHICLES
                (FHTV).
008            PLS ESP........                    127,102                                                127,102
010            TACTICAL                            48,292                                                 48,292
                WHEELED
                VEHICLE
                PROTECTION
                KITS.
011            MODIFICATION OF                    130,993                                                130,993
                IN SVC EQUIP.
012            MINE-RESISTANT                      19,146                                                 19,146
                AMBUSH-
                PROTECTED
                (MRAP) MODS.
               NON-TACTICAL
                VEHICLES
014            PASSENGER                            1,248                                                  1,248
                CARRYING
                VEHICLES.
015            NONTACTICAL                          9,614                                                  9,614
                VEHICLES,
                OTHER.
               COMM--JOINT
                COMMUNICATIONS
016            WIN-T--GROUND                      783,116                    -40,000                     743,116
                FORCES
                TACTICAL
                NETWORK.
                   Unobligated                                              [-40,000]
                   balances.
017            SIGNAL                              49,898                                                 49,898
                MODERNIZATION
                PROGRAM.
018            JOINT INCIDENT                       4,062                                                  4,062
                SITE
                COMMUNICATIONS
                CAPABILITY.
019            JCSE EQUIPMENT                       5,008                                                  5,008
                (USREDCOM).
               COMM--SATELLITE
                COMMUNICATIONS
020            DEFENSE                            196,306                                                196,306
                ENTERPRISE
                WIDEBAND
                SATCOM SYSTEMS.
021            TRANSPORTABLE                       44,998                    -10,000                      34,998
                TACTICAL
                COMMAND
                COMMUNICATIONS.
                   Program                                                  [-10,000]
                   Reduction.
022            SHF TERM.......                      7,629                                                  7,629
023            NAVSTAR GLOBAL                      14,027                                                 14,027
                POSITIONING
                SYSTEM (SPACE).
024            SMART-T (SPACE)                     13,453                                                 13,453
025            GLOBAL BRDCST                        6,265                                                  6,265
                SVC--GBS.
026            MOD OF IN-SVC                        1,042                                                  1,042
                EQUIP (TAC
                SAT).
027            ENROUTE MISSION                      7,116                                                  7,116
                COMMAND (EMC).
               COMM--C3 SYSTEM
028            ARMY GLOBAL CMD                     10,137                                                 10,137
                & CONTROL SYS
                (AGCCS).
               COMM--COMBAT
                COMMUNICATIONS
029            JOINT TACTICAL                      64,640                    -10,000                      54,640
                RADIO SYSTEM.
                   Unobligated                                              [-10,000]
                   balances.
030            MID-TIER                            27,762                     -5,000                      22,762
                NETWORKING
                VEHICULAR
                RADIO (MNVR).
                   Excess                                                    [-5,000]
                   Program
                   Management
                   Costs.
031            RADIO TERMINAL                       9,422                                                  9,422
                SET, MIDS
                LVT(2).
032            AMC CRITICAL                        26,020                                                 26,020
                ITEMS--OPA2.
033            TRACTOR DESK...                      4,073                                                  4,073
034            SPIDER APLA                          1,403                                                  1,403
                REMOTE CONTROL
                UNIT.
035            SPIDER FAMILY                        9,199                                                  9,199
                OF NETWORKED
                MUNITIONS INCR.
036            SOLDIER                                349                                                    349
                ENHANCEMENT
                PROGRAM COMM/
                ELECTRONICS.
037            TACTICAL                            25,597                                                 25,597
                COMMUNICATIONS
                AND PROTECTIVE
                SYSTEM.
038            UNIFIED COMMAND                     21,854                                                 21,854
                SUITE.
040            FAMILY OF MED                       24,388                                                 24,388
                COMM FOR
                COMBAT
                CASUALTY CARE.
               COMM--INTELLIGE
                NCE COMM
042            CI AUTOMATION                        1,349                                                  1,349
                ARCHITECTURE.
043            ARMY CA/MISO                         3,695                                                  3,695
                GPF EQUIPMENT.
               INFORMATION
                SECURITY
045            INFORMATION                         19,920                                                 19,920
                SYSTEM
                SECURITY
                PROGRAM-ISSP.
046            COMMUNICATIONS                      72,257                                                 72,257
                SECURITY
                (COMSEC).
               COMM--LONG HAUL
                COMMUNICATIONS
047            BASE SUPPORT                        16,082                                                 16,082
                COMMUNICATIONS.
               COMM--BASE
                COMMUNICATIONS
048            INFORMATION                         86,037                                                 86,037
                SYSTEMS.
050            EMERGENCY                            8,550                                                  8,550
                MANAGEMENT
                MODERNIZATION
                PROGRAM.
051            INSTALLATION                        73,496                                                 73,496
                INFO
                INFRASTRUCTURE
                MOD PROGRAM.
               ELECT EQUIP--
                TACT INT REL
                ACT (TIARA)
054            JTT/CIBS-M.....                        881                                                    881
055            PROPHET GROUND.                     63,650                    -15,000                      48,650
                   Program                                                  [-15,000]
                   reduction.
057            DCGS-A (MIP)...                    260,268                    -10,000                     250,268
                   Program                                                  [-10,000]
                   reduction.
058            JOINT TACTICAL                       3,906                                                  3,906
                GROUND STATION
                (JTAGS).
059            TROJAN (MIP)...                     13,929                                                 13,929
060            MOD OF IN-SVC                        3,978                                                  3,978
                EQUIP (INTEL
                SPT) (MIP).
061            CI HUMINT AUTO                       7,542                                                  7,542
                REPRTING AND
                COLL(CHARCS).
062            CLOSE ACCESS                         8,010                                                  8,010
                TARGET
                RECONNAISSANCE
                (CATR).
063            MACHINE FOREIGN                      8,125                                                  8,125
                LANGUAGE
                TRANSLATION
                SYSTEM-M.
               ELECT EQUIP--
                ELECTRONIC
                WARFARE (EW)
064            LIGHTWEIGHT                         63,472                                                 63,472
                COUNTER MORTAR
                RADAR.
065            EW PLANNING &                        2,556                                                  2,556
                MANAGEMENT
                TOOLS (EWPMT).
066            AIR VIGILANCE                        8,224                                                  8,224
                (AV).
067            CREW...........                      2,960                                                  2,960
068            FAMILY OF                            1,722                                                  1,722
                PERSISTENT
                SURVEILLANCE
                CAPABILITIE.
069            COUNTERINTELLIG                        447                                                    447
                ENCE/SECURITY
                COUNTERMEASURE
                S.
070            CI                                     228                                                    228
                MODERNIZATION.
               ELECT EQUIP--
                TACTICAL SURV.
                (TAC SURV)
071            SENTINEL MODS..                     43,285                                                 43,285
072            NIGHT VISION                       124,216                                                124,216
                DEVICES.
074            SMALL TACTICAL                      23,216                                                 23,216
                OPTICAL RIFLE
                MOUNTED MLRF.
076            INDIRECT FIRE                       60,679                                                 60,679
                PROTECTION
                FAMILY OF
                SYSTEMS.
077            FAMILY OF                           53,453                                                 53,453
                WEAPON SIGHTS
                (FWS).
078            ARTILLERY                            3,338                                                  3,338
                ACCURACY EQUIP.
079            PROFILER.......                      4,057                                                  4,057
081            JOINT BATTLE                       133,339                                                133,339
                COMMAND--PLATF
                ORM (JBC-P).
082            JOINT EFFECTS                       47,212                                                 47,212
                TARGETING
                SYSTEM (JETS).
083            MOD OF IN-SVC                       22,314                                                 22,314
                EQUIP (LLDR).
084            COMPUTER                            12,131                                                 12,131
                BALLISTICS:
                LHMBC XM32.
085            MORTAR FIRE                         10,075                                                 10,075
                CONTROL SYSTEM.
086            COUNTERFIRE                        217,379                    -30,000                     187,379
                RADARS.
                   Unobligated                                              [-30,000]
                   balances.
               ELECT EQUIP--
                TACTICAL C2
                SYSTEMS
087            FIRE SUPPORT C2                      1,190                                                  1,190
                FAMILY.
090            AIR & MSL                           28,176                                                 28,176
                DEFENSE
                PLANNING &
                CONTROL SYS.
091            IAMD BATTLE                         20,917                     -5,000                      15,917
                COMMAND SYSTEM.
                   Program                                                   [-5,000]
                   Reduction.
092            LIFE CYCLE                           5,850                                                  5,850
                SOFTWARE
                SUPPORT (LCSS).
093            NETWORK                             12,738                                                 12,738
                MANAGEMENT
                INITIALIZATION
                AND SERVICE.
094            MANEUVER                           145,405                                                145,405
                CONTROL SYSTEM
                (MCS).
095            GLOBAL COMBAT                      162,654                                                162,654
                SUPPORT SYSTEM-
                ARMY (GCSS-A).
096            INTEGRATED                           4,446                                                  4,446
                PERSONNEL AND
                PAY SYSTEM-
                ARMY (IPP.
098            RECONNAISSANCE                      16,218                                                 16,218
                AND SURVEYING
                INSTRUMENT SET.
099            MOD OF IN-SVC                        1,138                                                  1,138
                EQUIPMENT
                (ENFIRE).
               ELECT EQUIP--
                AUTOMATION
100            ARMY TRAINING                       12,089                                                 12,089
                MODERNIZATION.
101            AUTOMATED DATA                     105,775                                                105,775
                PROCESSING
                EQUIP.
102            GENERAL FUND                        18,995                                                 18,995
                ENTERPRISE
                BUSINESS
                SYSTEMS FAM.
103            HIGH PERF                           62,319                                                 62,319
                COMPUTING MOD
                PGM (HPCMP).
104            RESERVE                             17,894                                                 17,894
                COMPONENT
                AUTOMATION SYS
                (RCAS).
               ELECT EQUIP--
                AUDIO VISUAL
                SYS (A/V)
106            ITEMS LESS THAN                      4,242                                                  4,242
                $5M (SURVEYING
                EQUIPMENT).
               ELECT EQUIP--
                SUPPORT
107            PRODUCTION BASE                        425                                                    425
                SUPPORT (C-E).
108            BCT EMERGING                         7,438                                                  7,438
                TECHNOLOGIES.
               CLASSIFIED
                PROGRAMS
108A           CLASSIFIED                           6,467                                                  6,467
                PROGRAMS.
               CHEMICAL
                DEFENSIVE
                EQUIPMENT
109            PROTECTIVE                             248                                                    248
                SYSTEMS.
110            FAMILY OF NON-                       1,487                                                  1,487
                LETHAL
                EQUIPMENT
                (FNLE).
112            CBRN DEFENSE...                     26,302                                                 26,302
               BRIDGING
                EQUIPMENT
113            TACTICAL                             9,822                                                  9,822
                BRIDGING.
114            TACTICAL                            21,516                                                 21,516
                BRIDGE, FLOAT-
                RIBBON.
115            BRIDGE                               4,959                                                  4,959
                SUPPLEMENTAL
                SET.
116            COMMON BRIDGE                       52,546                    -10,000                      42,546
                TRANSPORTER
                (CBT) RECAP.
                   Program                                                  [-10,000]
                   decrease.
               ENGINEER (NON-
                CONSTRUCTION)
                EQUIPMENT
117            GRND STANDOFF                       58,682                                                 58,682
                MINE DETECTN
                SYSM
                (GSTAMIDS).
118            HUSKY MOUNTED                       13,565                                                 13,565
                DETECTION
                SYSTEM (HMDS).
119            ROBOTIC COMBAT                       2,136                                                  2,136
                SUPPORT SYSTEM
                (RCSS).
120            EOD ROBOTICS                         6,960                                                  6,960
                SYSTEMS
                RECAPITALIZATI
                ON.
121            EXPLOSIVE                           17,424                                                 17,424
                ORDNANCE
                DISPOSAL EQPMT
                (EOD EQPMT).
122            REMOTE                               8,284                                                  8,284
                DEMOLITION
                SYSTEMS.
123            < $5M,                               5,459                                                  5,459
                COUNTERMINE
                EQUIPMENT.
124            FAMILY OF BOATS                      8,429                                                  8,429
                AND MOTORS.
               COMBAT SERVICE
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT
125            HEATERS AND                         18,876                                                 18,876
                ECU'S.
127            SOLDIER                              2,287                                                  2,287
                ENHANCEMENT.
128            PERSONNEL                            7,733                                                  7,733
                RECOVERY
                SUPPORT SYSTEM
                (PRSS).
129            GROUND SOLDIER                      49,798                                                 49,798
                SYSTEM.
130            MOBILE SOLDIER                      43,639                                                 43,639
                POWER.
132            FIELD FEEDING                       13,118                                                 13,118
                EQUIPMENT.
133            CARGO AERIAL                        28,278                                                 28,278
                DEL &
                PERSONNEL
                PARACHUTE
                SYSTEM.
135            FAMILY OF ENGR                      34,544                                                 34,544
                COMBAT AND
                CONSTRUCTION
                SETS.
136            ITEMS LESS THAN                        595                                                    595
                $5M (ENG SPT).
               PETROLEUM
                EQUIPMENT
137            QUALITY                              5,368                                                  5,368
                SURVEILLANCE
                EQUIPMENT.
138            DISTRIBUTION                        35,381                                                 35,381
                SYSTEMS,
                PETROLEUM &
                WATER.
               MEDICAL
                EQUIPMENT
139            COMBAT SUPPORT                      73,828                                                 73,828
                MEDICAL.
               MAINTENANCE
                EQUIPMENT
140            MOBILE                              25,270                                                 25,270
                MAINTENANCE
                EQUIPMENT
                SYSTEMS.
141            ITEMS LESS THAN                      2,760                                                  2,760
                $5.0M (MAINT
                EQ).
               CONSTRUCTION
                EQUIPMENT
142            GRADER, ROAD                         5,903                                                  5,903
                MTZD, HVY, 6X4
                (CCE).
143            SCRAPERS,                           26,125                                                 26,125
                EARTHMOVING.
146            TRACTOR, FULL                       27,156                                                 27,156
                TRACKED.
147            ALL TERRAIN                         16,750                                                 16,750
                CRANES.
148            PLANT, ASPHALT                         984                                                    984
                MIXING.
149            HIGH MOBILITY                        2,656                                                  2,656
                ENGINEER
                EXCAVATOR
                (HMEE).
150            ENHANCED RAPID                       2,531                                                  2,531
                AIRFIELD
                CONSTRUCTION
                CAPAP.
151            FAMILY OF DIVER                        446                                                    446
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
152            CONST EQUIP ESP                     19,640                                                 19,640
153            ITEMS LESS THAN                      5,087                                                  5,087
                $5.0M (CONST
                EQUIP).
               RAIL FLOAT
                CONTAINERIZATI
                ON EQUIPMENT
154            ARMY WATERCRAFT                     39,772                                                 39,772
                ESP.
155            ITEMS LESS THAN                      5,835                     89,000                      94,835
                $5.0M (FLOAT/
                RAIL).
                   Strategic                                                 [89,000]
                   mobility
                   shortfall
                   mitigation -
                    railcar
                   acquisition.
               GENERATORS
156            GENERATORS AND                     166,356                    -20,000                     146,356
                ASSOCIATED
                EQUIP.
                   Program                                                  [-20,000]
                   decrease.
157            TACTICAL                            11,505                                                 11,505
                ELECTRIC POWER
                RECAPITALIZATI
                ON.
               MATERIAL
                HANDLING
                EQUIPMENT
159            FAMILY OF                           17,496                                                 17,496
                FORKLIFTS.
               TRAINING
                EQUIPMENT
160            COMBAT TRAINING                     74,916                                                 74,916
                CENTERS
                SUPPORT.
161            TRAINING                           303,236                    -25,000                     278,236
                DEVICES,
                NONSYSTEM.
                   Program                                                  [-25,000]
                   reduction.
162            CLOSE COMBAT                        45,210                                                 45,210
                TACTICAL
                TRAINER.
163            AVIATION                            30,068                                                 30,068
                COMBINED ARMS
                TACTICAL
                TRAINER.
164            GAMING                               9,793                                                  9,793
                TECHNOLOGY IN
                SUPPORT OF
                ARMY TRAINING.
               TEST MEASURE
                AND DIG
                EQUIPMENT
                (TMD)
165            CALIBRATION                          4,650                                                  4,650
                SETS EQUIPMENT.
166            INTEGRATED                          34,487                                                 34,487
                FAMILY OF TEST
                EQUIPMENT
                (IFTE).
167            TEST EQUIPMENT                      11,083                                                 11,083
                MODERNIZATION
                (TEMOD).
               OTHER SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT
169            RAPID EQUIPPING                     17,937                                                 17,937
                SOLDIER
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
170            PHYSICAL                            52,040                                                 52,040
                SECURITY
                SYSTEMS (OPA3).
171            BASE LEVEL                           1,568                                                  1,568
                COMMON
                EQUIPMENT.
172            MODIFICATION OF                     64,219                                                 64,219
                IN-SVC
                EQUIPMENT (OPA-
                3).
173            PRODUCTION BASE                      1,525                                                  1,525
                SUPPORT (OTH).
174            SPECIAL                              3,268                                                  3,268
                EQUIPMENT FOR
                USER TESTING.
176            TRACTOR YARD...                      7,191                                                  7,191
               OPA2
177            INITIAL SPARES--                    48,511                                                 48,511
                C&E.
                    TOTAL             889       5,899,028                    -91,000         889       5,808,028
                    OTHER
                    PROCUREMEN
                    T, ARMY.
 
               AIRCRAFT
                PROCUREMENT,
                NAVY
               COMBAT AIRCRAFT
002            F/A-18E/F                                          12       1,150,000          12       1,150,000
                (FIGHTER)
                HORNET.
                   Additional                                   [12]      [1,150,000]
                   12
                   Aircraft--N
                   avy
                   Unfunded
                   Requirement.
003            JOINT STRIKE             4         897,542                    -24,500           4         873,042
                FIGHTER CV.
                   Anticipated                                               [-7,700]
                   contract
                   savings.
                   Cost growth                                              [-16,800]
                   for support
                   equipment.
004               ADVANCE                          48,630                                                 48,630
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
005            JSF STOVL......          9       1,483,414          6         974,900          15       2,458,314
                   Additional                                    [6]      [1,000,000]
                   6 Aircraft--
                   Marine
                   Corps
                   Unfunded
                   Requirement.
                   Anticipated                                              [-17,600]
                   contract
                   savings.
                   Cost growth                                               [-7,500]
                   for support
                   equipment.
006               ADVANCE                         203,060                                                203,060
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
007               ADVANCE                          41,300                                                 41,300
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
008            V-22 (MEDIUM            19       1,436,355                                     19       1,436,355
                LIFT).
009               ADVANCE                          43,853                                                 43,853
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
010            H-1 UPGRADES            28         800,057                                     28         800,057
                (UH-1Y/AH-1Z).
011               ADVANCE                          56,168                                                 56,168
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
012            MH-60S (MYP)...                     28,232                                                 28,232
014            MH-60R (MYP)...         29         969,991                                     29         969,991
016            P-8A POSEIDON..         16       3,008,928                                     16       3,008,928
017               ADVANCE                         269,568                                                269,568
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
018            E-2D ADV                 5         857,654                                      5         857,654
                HAWKEYE.
019               ADVANCE                         195,336                                                195,336
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
               TRAINER
                AIRCRAFT
020            JPATS..........                      8,914                                                  8,914
               OTHER AIRCRAFT
021            KC-130J........          2         192,214                                      2         192,214
022               ADVANCE                          24,451                                                 24,451
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
023            MQ-4 TRITON....          3         494,259          1          65,000           4         559,259
                   Additional                                    [1]         [65,000]
                   Air Vehicle.
024               ADVANCE                          54,577                     18,000                      72,577
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
                   Additional                                                [18,000]
                   Advance
                   Procurement.
025            MQ-8 UAV.......          2         120,020                     36,000           2         156,020
                   MQ-8 UAV-                                                 [36,000]
                   Additional
                   three air
                   vehicles.
026            STUASL0 UAV....                      3,450                                                  3,450
               MODIFICATION OF
                AIRCRAFT
028            EA-6 SERIES....                      9,799                                                  9,799
029            AEA SYSTEMS....                     23,151                     15,000                      38,151
                   Additional                                                [15,000]
                   Low Band
                   Transmitter
                   Modificatio
                   ns.
030            AV-8 SERIES....                     41,890                                                 41,890
031            ADVERSARY......                      5,816                                                  5,816
032            F-18 SERIES....                    978,756                    -10,300                     968,456
                   Unjustified                                              [-10,300]
                   request.
034            H-53 SERIES....                     46,887                                                 46,887
035            SH-60 SERIES...                    107,728                                                107,728
036            H-1 SERIES.....                     42,315                                                 42,315
037            EP-3 SERIES....                     41,784                                                 41,784
038            P-3 SERIES.....                      3,067                                                  3,067
039            E-2 SERIES.....                     20,741                                                 20,741
040            TRAINER A/C                         27,980                                                 27,980
                SERIES.
041            C-2A...........                      8,157                                                  8,157
042            C-130 SERIES...                     70,335                                                 70,335
043            FEWSG..........                        633                                                    633
044            CARGO/TRANSPORT                      8,916                                                  8,916
                A/C SERIES.
045            E-6 SERIES.....                    185,253                                                185,253
046            EXECUTIVE                           76,138                                                 76,138
                HELICOPTERS
                SERIES.
047            SPECIAL PROJECT                     23,702                                                 23,702
                AIRCRAFT.
048            T-45 SERIES....                    105,439                                                105,439
049            POWER PLANT                          9,917                                                  9,917
                CHANGES.
050            JPATS SERIES...                     13,537                                                 13,537
051            COMMON ECM                         131,732                                                131,732
                EQUIPMENT.
052            COMMON AVIONICS                    202,745                                                202,745
                CHANGES.
053            COMMON                               3,062                                                  3,062
                DEFENSIVE
                WEAPON SYSTEM.
054            ID SYSTEMS.....                     48,206                                                 48,206
055            P-8 SERIES.....                     28,492                                                 28,492
056            MAGTF EW FOR                         7,680                                                  7,680
                AVIATION.
057            MQ-8 SERIES....                     22,464                                                 22,464
058            RQ-7 SERIES....                      3,773                                                  3,773
059            V-22 (TILT/                        121,208                                                121,208
                ROTOR ACFT)
                OSPREY.
060            F-35 STOVL                         256,106                                                256,106
                SERIES.
061            F-35 CV SERIES.                     68,527                                                 68,527
062            QRC............                      6,885                                                  6,885
               AIRCRAFT SPARES
                AND REPAIR
                PARTS
063            SPARES AND                       1,563,515                    -10,000                   1,553,515
                REPAIR PARTS.
                   Program                                                  [-10,000]
                   decrease.
               AIRCRAFT
                SUPPORT EQUIP
                & FACILITIES
064            COMMON GROUND                      450,959                                                450,959
                EQUIPMENT.
065            AIRCRAFT                            24,010                                                 24,010
                INDUSTRIAL
                FACILITIES.
066            WAR CONSUMABLES                     42,012                                                 42,012
067            OTHER                                2,455                                                  2,455
                PRODUCTION
                CHARGES.
068            SPECIAL SUPPORT                     50,859                                                 50,859
                EQUIPMENT.
069            FIRST                                1,801                                                  1,801
                DESTINATION
                TRANSPORTATION.
                    TOTAL             117      16,126,405         19       2,214,100         136      18,340,505
                    AIRCRAFT
                    PROCUREMEN
                    T, NAVY.
 
               WEAPONS
                PROCUREMENT,
                NAVY
               MODIFICATION OF
                MISSILES
001            TRIDENT II MODS                  1,099,064                                              1,099,064
               SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT &
                FACILITIES
002            MISSILE                              7,748                                                  7,748
                INDUSTRIAL
                FACILITIES.
               STRATEGIC
                MISSILES
003            TOMAHAWK.......        100         184,814         49          30,000         149         214,814
                   Minimum                                      [49]         [30,000]
                   Sustaining
                   Rate
                   Increase.
               TACTICAL
                MISSILES
004            AMRAAM.........        167         192,873                                    167         192,873
005            SIDEWINDER.....        227          96,427                                    227          96,427
006            JSOW...........                     21,419         85          47,800          85          69,219
                   Industrial                                   [85]         [47,800]
                   Base
                   Sustainment.
007            STANDARD               113         435,352                                    113         435,352
                MISSILE.
008            RAM............         90          80,826                                     90          80,826
011            STAND OFF               27           4,265                                     27           4,265
                PRECISION
                GUIDED
                MUNITIONS
                (SOPGM).
012            AERIAL TARGETS.                     40,792                                                 40,792
013            OTHER MISSILE                        3,335                                                  3,335
                SUPPORT.
               MODIFICATION OF
                MISSILES
014            ESSM...........         30          44,440                                     30          44,440
015               ADVANCE                          54,462                                                 54,462
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
016            HARM MODS......                    122,298                                                122,298
               SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT &
                FACILITIES
017            WEAPONS                              2,397                                                  2,397
                INDUSTRIAL
                FACILITIES.
018            FLEET SATELLITE                     39,932                                                 39,932
                COMM FOLLOW-ON.
               ORDNANCE
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT
019            ORDNANCE                            57,641                                                 57,641
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
               TORPEDOES AND
                RELATED EQUIP
020            SSTD...........                      7,380                                                  7,380
021            MK-48 TORPEDO..          8          65,611                                      8          65,611
022            ASW TARGETS....                      6,912                                                  6,912
               MOD OF
                TORPEDOES AND
                RELATED EQUIP
023            MK-54 TORPEDO                      113,219                                                113,219
                MODS.
024            MK-48 TORPEDO                       63,317                                                 63,317
                ADCAP MODS.
025            QUICKSTRIKE                         13,254                                                 13,254
                MINE.
               SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT
026            TORPEDO SUPPORT                     67,701                                                 67,701
                EQUIPMENT.
027            ASW RANGE                            3,699                                                  3,699
                SUPPORT.
               DESTINATION
                TRANSPORTATION
028            FIRST                                3,342                                                  3,342
                DESTINATION
                TRANSPORTATION.
               GUNS AND GUN
                MOUNTS
029            SMALL ARMS AND                      11,937                                                 11,937
                WEAPONS.
               MODIFICATION OF
                GUNS AND GUN
                MOUNTS
030            CIWS MODS......                     53,147                                                 53,147
031            COAST GUARD                         19,022                                                 19,022
                WEAPONS.
032            GUN MOUNT MODS.                     67,980                                                 67,980
033            AIRBORNE MINE                       19,823                                                 19,823
                NEUTRALIZATION
                SYSTEMS.
               SPARES AND
                REPAIR PARTS
035            SPARES AND                         149,725                                                149,725
                REPAIR PARTS.
                    TOTAL             762       3,154,154        134          77,800         896       3,231,954
                    WEAPONS
                    PROCUREMEN
                    T, NAVY.
 
               PROCUREMENT OF
                AMMO, NAVY &
                MC
               NAVY AMMUNITION
001            GENERAL PURPOSE                    101,238                                                101,238
                BOMBS.
002            AIRBORNE                            67,289                                                 67,289
                ROCKETS, ALL
                TYPES.
003            MACHINE GUN                         20,340                                                 20,340
                AMMUNITION.
004            PRACTICE BOMBS.                     40,365                                                 40,365
005            CARTRIDGES &                        49,377                                                 49,377
                CART ACTUATED
                DEVICES.
006            AIR EXPENDABLE                      59,651                                                 59,651
                COUNTERMEASURE
                S.
007            JATOS..........                      2,806                                                  2,806
008            LRLAP 6" LONG                       11,596                                                 11,596
                RANGE ATTACK
                PROJECTILE.
009            5 INCH/54 GUN                       35,994                                                 35,994
                AMMUNITION.
010            INTERMEDIATE                        36,715                                                 36,715
                CALIBER GUN
                AMMUNITION.
011            OTHER SHIP GUN                      45,483                                                 45,483
                AMMUNITION.
012            SMALL ARMS &                        52,080                                                 52,080
                LANDING PARTY
                AMMO.
013            PYROTECHNIC AND                     10,809                                                 10,809
                DEMOLITION.
014            AMMUNITION LESS                      4,469                                                  4,469
                THAN $5
                MILLION.
               MARINE CORPS
                AMMUNITION
015            SMALL ARMS                          46,848                                                 46,848
                AMMUNITION.
016            LINEAR CHARGES,                        350                                                    350
                ALL TYPES.
017            40 MM, ALL                             500                                                    500
                TYPES.
018            60MM, ALL TYPES                      1,849                                                  1,849
019            81MM, ALL TYPES                      1,000                                                  1,000
020            120MM, ALL                          13,867                                                 13,867
                TYPES.
022            GRENADES, ALL                        1,390                                                  1,390
                TYPES.
023            ROCKETS, ALL                        14,967                                                 14,967
                TYPES.
024            ARTILLERY, ALL                      45,219                                                 45,219
                TYPES.
026            FUZE, ALL TYPES                     29,335                                                 29,335
027            NON LETHALS....                      3,868                                                  3,868
028            AMMO                                15,117                                                 15,117
                MODERNIZATION.
029            ITEMS LESS THAN                     11,219                                                 11,219
                $5 MILLION.
                    TOTAL                         723,741                                                723,741
                    PROCUREMEN
                    T OF AMMO,
                    NAVY & MC.
 
               SHIPBUILDING &
                CONVERSION,
                NAVY
               OTHER WARSHIPS
001               ADVANCE                       1,634,701                                              1,634,701
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
002               ADVANCE                         874,658                                                874,658
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
003            VIRGINIA CLASS           2       3,346,370                                      2       3,346,370
                SUBMARINE.
004               ADVANCE                       1,993,740                                              1,993,740
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
005            CVN REFUELING            1         678,274                                      1         678,274
                OVERHAULS.
006               ADVANCE                          14,951                                                 14,951
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
007            DDG 1000.......                    433,404                                                433,404
008            DDG-51.........          2       3,149,703                                      2       3,149,703
010            LITTORAL COMBAT          3       1,356,991                                      3       1,356,991
                SHIP.
               AMPHIBIOUS
                SHIPS
012            LPD-17.........          1         550,000                                      1         550,000
013A           AFLOAT FORWARD                                                 97,000                      97,000
                STAGING BASE
                ADVANCE
                PROCUREMENT
                (CY).
                   Procurement                                               [97,000]
014A           LX(R) ADVANCE                                                 250,000                     250,000
                PROCURMENT
                (CY).
                   LX(R)                                                    [250,000]
                   Acceleratio
                   n.
015            LHA REPLACEMENT                    277,543                                                277,543
                ADVANCE
                PROCUREMENT
                (CY).
               AUXILIARIES,
                CRAFT AND
                PRIOR YR
                PROGRAM COST
017            TAO FLEET OILER          1         674,190         -1        -674,190                           0
                   Transfer to                                  [-1]       [-674,190]
                   NDSF--Title
                   XIV.
019               ADVANCE                         138,200                                                138,200
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
020            OUTFITTING.....                    697,207                                                697,207
021            SHIP TO SHORE            5         255,630                                      5         255,630
                CONNECTOR.
022            SERVICE CRAFT..                     30,014                                                 30,014
023            LCAC SLEP......          4          80,738                                      4          80,738
024            YP CRAFT                            21,838                                                 21,838
                MAINTENANCE/
                ROH/SLEP.
025            COMPLETION OF                      389,305                                                389,305
                PY
                SHIPBUILDING
                PROGRAMS.
                    TOTAL              19      16,597,457         -1        -327,190          18      16,270,267
                    SHIPBUILDI
                    NG &
                    CONVERSION
                    , NAVY.
 
               OTHER
                PROCUREMENT,
                NAVY
               SHIP PROPULSION
                EQUIPMENT
001            LM-2500 GAS                          4,881                                                  4,881
                TURBINE.
002            ALLISON 501K                         5,814                                                  5,814
                GAS TURBINE.
003            HYBRID ELECTRIC                     32,906                                                 32,906
                DRIVE (HED).
               GENERATORS
004            SURFACE                             36,860                                                 36,860
                COMBATANT HM&E.
               NAVIGATION
                EQUIPMENT
005            OTHER                               87,481                                                 87,481
                NAVIGATION
                EQUIPMENT.
               PERISCOPES
006            SUB PERISCOPES                      63,109                                                 63,109
                & IMAGING
                EQUIP.
               OTHER SHIPBOARD
                EQUIPMENT
007            DDG MOD........                    364,157          1          60,000           1         424,157
                   Additional                                    [1]         [60,000]
                   DDG
                   Modificatio
                   n-Unfunded
                   Requirement.
008            FIREFIGHTING                        16,089                                                 16,089
                EQUIPMENT.
009            COMMAND AND                          2,255                                                  2,255
                CONTROL
                SWITCHBOARD.
010            LHA/LHD MIDLIFE                     28,571                                                 28,571
011            LCC 19/20                           12,313                                                 12,313
                EXTENDED
                SERVICE LIFE
                PROGRAM.
012            POLLUTION                           16,609                                                 16,609
                CONTROL
                EQUIPMENT.
013            SUBMARINE                           10,498                                                 10,498
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
014            VIRGINIA CLASS                      35,747                                                 35,747
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
015            LCS CLASS                           48,399                                                 48,399
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
016            SUBMARINE                           23,072                                                 23,072
                BATTERIES.
017            LPD CLASS                           55,283                                                 55,283
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
018            STRATEGIC                           18,563                                                 18,563
                PLATFORM
                SUPPORT EQUIP.
019            DSSP EQUIPMENT.                      7,376                                                  7,376
021            LCAC...........                     20,965                                                 20,965
022            UNDERWATER EOD                      51,652                                                 51,652
                PROGRAMS.
023            ITEMS LESS THAN                    102,498                                                102,498
                $5 MILLION.
024            CHEMICAL                             3,027                                                  3,027
                WARFARE
                DETECTORS.
025            SUBMARINE LIFE                       7,399                                                  7,399
                SUPPORT SYSTEM.
               REACTOR PLANT
                EQUIPMENT
027            REACTOR                            296,095                                                296,095
                COMPONENTS.
               OCEAN
                ENGINEERING
028            DIVING AND                          15,982                                                 15,982
                SALVAGE
                EQUIPMENT.
               SMALL BOATS
029            STANDARD BOATS.                     29,982                                                 29,982
               TRAINING
                EQUIPMENT
030            OTHER SHIPS                         66,538                                                 66,538
                TRAINING
                EQUIPMENT.
               PRODUCTION
                FACILITIES
                EQUIPMENT
031            OPERATING                           71,138                                                 71,138
                FORCES IPE.
               OTHER SHIP
                SUPPORT
032            NUCLEAR                            132,625                                                132,625
                ALTERATIONS.
033            LCS COMMON                          23,500                                                 23,500
                MISSION
                MODULES
                EQUIPMENT.
034            LCS MCM MISSION                     85,151                                                 85,151
                MODULES.
035            LCS SUW MISSION                     35,228                                                 35,228
                MODULES.
036            REMOTE                              87,627                                                 87,627
                MINEHUNTING
                SYSTEM (RMS).
               LOGISTIC
                SUPPORT
037            LSD MIDLIFE....                      2,774                                                  2,774
               SHIP SONARS
038            SPQ-9B RADAR...                     20,551                                                 20,551
039            AN/SQQ-89 SURF                     103,241                                                103,241
                ASW COMBAT
                SYSTEM.
040            SSN ACOUSTICS..                    214,835          4          20,000           4         234,835
                   Submarine                                     [4]         [20,000]
                   Towed Array-
                   Unfunded
                   Requirement.
041            UNDERSEA                             7,331                                                  7,331
                WARFARE
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
042            SONAR SWITCHES                      11,781                                                 11,781
                AND
                TRANSDUCERS.
               ASW ELECTRONIC
                EQUIPMENT
044            SUBMARINE                           21,119                                                 21,119
                ACOUSTIC
                WARFARE SYSTEM.
045            SSTD...........                      8,396                                                  8,396
046            FIXED                              146,968                                                146,968
                SURVEILLANCE
                SYSTEM.
047            SURTASS........                     12,953                                                 12,953
048            MARITIME PATROL                     13,725                                                 13,725
                AND
                RECONNSAISANCE
                FORCE.
               ELECTRONIC
                WARFARE
                EQUIPMENT
049            AN/SLQ-32......                    324,726          2          28,000           2         352,726
                   SEWIP Block                                   [2]         [28,000]
                   II-Unfunded
                   Requirement.
               RECONNAISSANCE
                EQUIPMENT
050            SHIPBOARD IW                       148,221                                                148,221
                EXPLOIT.
051            AUTOMATED                              152                                                    152
                IDENTIFICATION
                SYSTEM (AIS).
               SUBMARINE
                SURVEILLANCE
                EQUIPMENT
052            SUBMARINE                           79,954                                                 79,954
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT PROG.
               OTHER SHIP
                ELECTRONIC
                EQUIPMENT
053            COOPERATIVE                         25,695                                                 25,695
                ENGAGEMENT
                CAPABILITY.
054            TRUSTED                                284                                                    284
                INFORMATION
                SYSTEM (TIS).
055            NAVAL TACTICAL                      14,416                                                 14,416
                COMMAND
                SUPPORT SYSTEM
                (NTCSS).
056            ATDLS..........                     23,069                                                 23,069
057            NAVY COMMAND                         4,054                                                  4,054
                AND CONTROL
                SYSTEM (NCCS).
058            MINESWEEPING                        21,014                                                 21,014
                SYSTEM
                REPLACEMENT.
059            SHALLOW WATER                       18,077                                                 18,077
                MCM.
060            NAVSTAR GPS                         12,359                                                 12,359
                RECEIVERS
                (SPACE).
061            AMERICAN FORCES                      4,240                                                  4,240
                RADIO AND TV
                SERVICE.
062            STRATEGIC                           17,440                                                 17,440
                PLATFORM
                SUPPORT EQUIP.
               TRAINING
                EQUIPMENT
063            OTHER TRAINING                      41,314                                                 41,314
                EQUIPMENT.
               AVIATION
                ELECTRONIC
                EQUIPMENT
064            MATCALS........                     10,011                                                 10,011
065            SHIPBOARD AIR                        9,346                                                  9,346
                TRAFFIC
                CONTROL.
066            AUTOMATIC                           21,281                                                 21,281
                CARRIER
                LANDING SYSTEM.
067            NATIONAL AIR                        25,621                                                 25,621
                SPACE SYSTEM.
068            FLEET AIR                            8,249                                                  8,249
                TRAFFIC
                CONTROL
                SYSTEMS.
069            LANDING SYSTEMS                     14,715                                                 14,715
070            ID SYSTEMS.....                     29,676                                                 29,676
071            NAVAL MISSION                       13,737                                                 13,737
                PLANNING
                SYSTEMS.
               OTHER SHORE
                ELECTRONIC
                EQUIPMENT
072            DEPLOYABLE                           1,314                                                  1,314
                JOINT COMMAND
                & CONTROL.
074            TACTICAL/MOBILE                     13,600                                                 13,600
                C4I SYSTEMS.
075            DCGS-N.........                     31,809                                                 31,809
076            CANES..........                    278,991                                                278,991
077            RADIAC.........                      8,294                                                  8,294
078            CANES-INTELL...                     28,695                                                 28,695
079            GPETE..........                      6,962                                                  6,962
080            MASF...........                        290                                                    290
081            INTEG COMBAT                        14,419                                                 14,419
                SYSTEM TEST
                FACILITY.
082            EMI CONTROL                          4,175                                                  4,175
                INSTRUMENTATIO
                N.
083            ITEMS LESS THAN                     44,176                                                 44,176
                $5 MILLION.
               SHIPBOARD
                COMMUNICATIONS
084            SHIPBOARD                            8,722                                                  8,722
                TACTICAL
                COMMUNICATIONS.
085            SHIP                               108,477                                                108,477
                COMMUNICATIONS
                AUTOMATION.
086            COMMUNICATIONS                      16,613                                                 16,613
                ITEMS UNDER
                $5M.
               SUBMARINE
                COMMUNICATIONS
087            SUBMARINE                           20,691                                                 20,691
                BROADCAST
                SUPPORT.
088            SUBMARINE                           60,945                                                 60,945
                COMMUNICATION
                EQUIPMENT.
               SATELLITE
                COMMUNICATIONS
089            SATELLITE                           30,892                                                 30,892
                COMMUNICATIONS
                SYSTEMS.
090            NAVY MULTIBAND                     118,113                                                118,113
                TERMINAL (NMT).
               SHORE
                COMMUNICATIONS
091            JCS                                  4,591                                                  4,591
                COMMUNICATIONS
                EQUIPMENT.
092            ELECTRICAL                           1,403                                                  1,403
                POWER SYSTEMS.
               CRYPTOGRAPHIC
                EQUIPMENT
093            INFO SYSTEMS                       135,687                                                135,687
                SECURITY
                PROGRAM (ISSP).
094            MIO INTEL                              970                                                    970
                EXPLOITATION
                TEAM.
               CRYPTOLOGIC
                EQUIPMENT
095            CRYPTOLOGIC                         11,433                                                 11,433
                COMMUNICATIONS
                EQUIP.
               OTHER
                ELECTRONIC
                SUPPORT
096            COAST GUARD                          2,529                                                  2,529
                EQUIPMENT.
               SONOBUOYS
097            SONOBUOYS--ALL                     168,763                                                168,763
                TYPES.
               AIRCRAFT
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT
098            WEAPONS RANGE                       46,979                                                 46,979
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
100            AIRCRAFT                           123,884          2           3,500           2         127,384
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
                   F-35 Visual/                                  [2]          [3,500]
                   Optical
                   Landing
                   System
                   Training
                   Equipment
                   Unfunded
                   Requirement.
103            METEOROLOGICAL                      15,090                                                 15,090
                EQUIPMENT.
104            DCRS/DPL.......                        638                                                    638
106            AIRBORNE MINE                       14,098                                                 14,098
                COUNTERMEASURE
                S.
111            AVIATION                            49,773                                                 49,773
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
               SHIP GUN SYSTEM
                EQUIPMENT
112            SHIP GUN                             5,300                                                  5,300
                SYSTEMS
                EQUIPMENT.
               SHIP MISSILE
                SYSTEMS
                EQUIPMENT
115            SHIP MISSILE                       298,738                                                298,738
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
120            TOMAHAWK                            71,245                                                 71,245
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
               FBM SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT
123            STRATEGIC                          240,694                                                240,694
                MISSILE
                SYSTEMS EQUIP.
               ASW SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT
124            SSN COMBAT                          96,040                                                 96,040
                CONTROL
                SYSTEMS.
125            ASW SUPPORT                         30,189                                                 30,189
                EQUIPMENT.
               OTHER ORDNANCE
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT
129            EXPLOSIVE                           22,623                                                 22,623
                ORDNANCE
                DISPOSAL EQUIP.
130            ITEMS LESS THAN                      9,906                                                  9,906
                $5 MILLION.
               OTHER
                EXPENDABLE
                ORDNANCE
134            TRAINING DEVICE                     99,707                                                 99,707
                MODS.
               CIVIL
                ENGINEERING
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT
135            PASSENGER                            2,252                                                  2,252
                CARRYING
                VEHICLES.
136            GENERAL PURPOSE                      2,191                                                  2,191
                TRUCKS.
137            CONSTRUCTION &                       2,164                                                  2,164
                MAINTENANCE
                EQUIP.
138            FIRE FIGHTING                       14,705                                                 14,705
                EQUIPMENT.
139            TACTICAL                             2,497                                                  2,497
                VEHICLES.
140            AMPHIBIOUS                          12,517                                                 12,517
                EQUIPMENT.
141            POLLUTION                            3,018                                                  3,018
                CONTROL
                EQUIPMENT.
142            ITEMS UNDER $5                      14,403                                                 14,403
                MILLION.
143            PHYSICAL                             1,186                                                  1,186
                SECURITY
                VEHICLES.
               SUPPLY SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT
144            MATERIALS                           18,805                                                 18,805
                HANDLING
                EQUIPMENT.
145            OTHER SUPPLY                        10,469                                                 10,469
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
146            FIRST                                5,720                                                  5,720
                DESTINATION
                TRANSPORTATION.
147            SPECIAL PURPOSE                    211,714                                                211,714
                SUPPLY SYSTEMS.
               TRAINING
                DEVICES
148            TRAINING                             7,468                                                  7,468
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
               COMMAND SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT
149            COMMAND SUPPORT                     36,433                                                 36,433
                EQUIPMENT.
150            EDUCATION                            3,180                                                  3,180
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
151            MEDICAL SUPPORT                      4,790                                                  4,790
                EQUIPMENT.
153            NAVAL MIP                            4,608                                                  4,608
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
154            OPERATING                            5,655                                                  5,655
                FORCES SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
155            C4ISR EQUIPMENT                      9,929                                                  9,929
156            ENVIRONMENTAL                       26,795                                                 26,795
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
157            PHYSICAL                            88,453                                                 88,453
                SECURITY
                EQUIPMENT.
159            ENTERPRISE                          99,094                                                 99,094
                INFORMATION
                TECHNOLOGY.
               OTHER
160            NEXT GENERATION                     99,014                                                 99,014
                ENTERPRISE
                SERVICE.
               CLASSIFIED
                PROGRAMS
160A           CLASSIFIED                          21,439                                                 21,439
                PROGRAMS.
               SPARES AND
                REPAIR PARTS
161            SPARES AND                         328,043                                                328,043
                REPAIR PARTS.
                    TOTAL                       6,614,715          9         111,500           9       6,726,215
                    OTHER
                    PROCUREMEN
                    T, NAVY.
 
               PROCUREMENT,
                MARINE CORPS
               TRACKED COMBAT
                VEHICLES
001            AAV7A1 PIP.....                     26,744                                                 26,744
002            LAV PIP........                     54,879                                                 54,879
               ARTILLERY AND
                OTHER WEAPONS
003            EXPEDITIONARY                        2,652                                                  2,652
                FIRE SUPPORT
                SYSTEM.
004            155MM                                7,482                                                  7,482
                LIGHTWEIGHT
                TOWED HOWITZER.
005            HIGH MOBILITY                       17,181                                                 17,181
                ARTILLERY
                ROCKET SYSTEM.
006            WEAPONS AND                          8,224                                                  8,224
                COMBAT
                VEHICLES UNDER
                $5 MILLION.
               OTHER SUPPORT
007            MODIFICATION                        14,467                                                 14,467
                KITS.
008            WEAPONS                                488                                                    488
                ENHANCEMENT
                PROGRAM.
               GUIDED MISSILES
009            GROUND BASED                         7,565                                                  7,565
                AIR DEFENSE.
010            JAVELIN........                      1,091        441          77,500         441          78,591
                   Program                                     [441]         [77,500]
                   increase to
                   support
                   Unfunded
                   Requirement
                   s.
011            FOLLOW ON TO                         4,872                                                  4,872
                SMAW.
012            ANTI-ARMOR                             668                                                    668
                WEAPONS SYSTEM-
                HEAVY (AAWS-H).
               OTHER SUPPORT
013            MODIFICATION                        12,495                                                 12,495
                KITS.
               COMMAND AND
                CONTROL
                SYSTEMS
014            UNIT OPERATIONS                     13,109                                                 13,109
                CENTER.
015            COMMON AVIATION                     35,147                                                 35,147
                COMMAND AND
                CONTROL SYSTEM
                (C.
               REPAIR AND TEST
                EQUIPMENT
016            REPAIR AND TEST                     21,210                                                 21,210
                EQUIPMENT.
               OTHER SUPPORT
                (TEL)
017            COMBAT SUPPORT                         792                                                    792
                SYSTEM.
               COMMAND AND
                CONTROL SYSTEM
                (NON-TEL)
019            ITEMS UNDER $5                       3,642                                                  3,642
                MILLION (COMM
                & ELEC).
020            AIR OPERATIONS                       3,520                                                  3,520
                C2 SYSTEMS.
               RADAR +
                EQUIPMENT (NON-
                TEL)
021            RADAR SYSTEMS..                     35,118                                                 35,118
022            GROUND/AIR TASK          3         130,661                    -40,000           3          90,661
                ORIENTED RADAR
                (G/ATOR).
                   Delay in                                                 [-40,000]
                   IOTE.
023            RQ-21 UAS......          4          84,916                                      4          84,916
               INTELL/COMM
                EQUIPMENT (NON-
                TEL)
024            FIRE SUPPORT                         9,136                                                  9,136
                SYSTEM.
025            INTELLIGENCE                        29,936                                                 29,936
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
028            DCGS-MC........                      1,947                                                  1,947
               OTHER COMM/ELEC
                EQUIPMENT (NON-
                TEL)
031            NIGHT VISION                         2,018                                                  2,018
                EQUIPMENT.
               OTHER SUPPORT
                (NON-TEL)
032            NEXT GENERATION                     67,295                                                 67,295
                ENTERPRISE
                NETWORK (NGEN).
033            COMMON COMPUTER                     43,101                                                 43,101
                RESOURCES.
034            COMMAND POST                        29,255                                                 29,255
                SYSTEMS.
035            RADIO SYSTEMS..                     80,584                                                 80,584
036            COMM SWITCHING                      66,123                                                 66,123
                & CONTROL
                SYSTEMS.
037            COMM & ELEC                         79,486                                                 79,486
                INFRASTRUCTURE
                SUPPORT.
               CLASSIFIED
                PROGRAMS
037A           CLASSIFIED                           2,803                                                  2,803
                PROGRAMS.
               ADMINISTRATIVE
                VEHICLES
038            COMMERCIAL                           3,538                                                  3,538
                PASSENGER
                VEHICLES.
039            COMMERCIAL                          22,806                                                 22,806
                CARGO VEHICLES.
               TACTICAL
                VEHICLES
041            MOTOR TRANSPORT                      7,743                                                  7,743
                MODIFICATIONS.
043            JOINT LIGHT            109          79,429                                    109          79,429
                TACTICAL
                VEHICLE.
044            FAMILY OF                            3,157                                                  3,157
                TACTICAL
                TRAILERS.
               OTHER SUPPORT
045            ITEMS LESS THAN                      6,938                                                  6,938
                $5 MILLION.
               ENGINEER AND
                OTHER
                EQUIPMENT
046            ENVIRONMENTAL                           94                                                     94
                CONTROL EQUIP
                ASSORT.
047            BULK LIQUID                            896                                                    896
                EQUIPMENT.
048            TACTICAL FUEL                          136                                                    136
                SYSTEMS.
049            POWER EQUIPMENT                     10,792                                                 10,792
                ASSORTED.
050            AMPHIBIOUS                           3,235                                                  3,235
                SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT.
051            EOD SYSTEMS....                      7,666                                                  7,666
               MATERIALS
                HANDLING
                EQUIPMENT
052            PHYSICAL                            33,145                                                 33,145
                SECURITY
                EQUIPMENT.
053            GARRISON MOBILE                      1,419                                                  1,419
                ENGINEER
                EQUIPMENT
                (GMEE).
               GENERAL
                PROPERTY
057            TRAINING                            24,163                                                 24,163
                DEVICES.
058            CONTAINER                              962                                                    962
                FAMILY.
059            FAMILY OF                            6,545                                                  6,545
                CONSTRUCTION
                EQUIPMENT.
060            FAMILY OF                            7,533                                                  7,533
                INTERNALLY
                TRANSPORTABLE
                VEH (ITV).
               OTHER SUPPORT
062            ITEMS LESS THAN                      4,322                                                  4,322
                $5 MILLION.
               SPARES AND
                REPAIR PARTS
063            SPARES AND                           8,292                                                  8,292
                REPAIR PARTS.
                    TOTAL             116       1,131,418        441          37,500         557       1,168,918
                    PROCUREMEN
                    T, MARINE
                    CORPS.
 
               AIRCRAFT
                PROCUREMENT,
                AIR FORCE
               TACTICAL FORCES
001            F-35...........         44       5,260,212                    -99,100          44       5,161,112
                   Anticipated                                              [-75,500]
                   contract
                   savings.
                   Cost growth                                              [-23,600]
                   for support
                   equipment.
002               ADVANCE                         460,260                                                460,260
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
               TACTICAL
                AIRLIFT
003            KC-46A TANKER..         12       2,350,601                    -24,000          12       2,326,601
                   Program                                                  [-24,000]
                   Decrease.
               OTHER AIRLIFT
004            C-130J.........         14         889,154          1          73,000          15         962,154
                   Unfunded                                      [1]         [73,000]
                   Requirement
                   s.
005               ADVANCE                          50,000                                                 50,000
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
006            HC-130J........          5         463,934                                      5         463,934
007               ADVANCE                          30,000                                                 30,000
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
008            MC-130J........          8         828,472                                      8         828,472
009               ADVANCE                          60,000                                                 60,000
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
               MISSION SUPPORT
                AIRCRAFT
011            CIVIL AIR                6           2,617                                      6           2,617
                PATROL A/C.
               OTHER AIRCRAFT
012            TARGET DRONES..         75         132,028                                     75         132,028
014            RQ-4...........                     37,800                                                 37,800
015            MQ-9...........         29         552,528                                     29         552,528
               STRATEGIC
                AIRCRAFT
017            B-2A...........                     32,458                                                 32,458
018            B-1B...........                    114,119                                                114,119
019            B-52...........                    148,987                                                148,987
020            LARGE AIRCRAFT                      84,335                                                 84,335
                INFRARED
                COUNTERMEASURE
                S.
               TACTICAL
                AIRCRAFT
021            A-10...........                                               240,000                     240,000
                   A-10                                                     [240,000]
                   restoration
                   - wing
                   replacement
                   program.
022            F-15...........                    464,367                                                464,367
023            F-16...........                     17,134                                                 17,134
024            F-22A..........                    126,152                                                126,152
025            F-35                                70,167                                                 70,167
                MODIFICATIONS.
026            INCREMENT 3.2B.                     69,325                                                 69,325
               AIRLIFT
                AIRCRAFT
028            C-5............                      5,604                                                  5,604
030            C-17A..........                     46,997                                                 46,997
031            C-21...........                     10,162                                                 10,162
032            C-32A..........                     44,464                                                 44,464
033            C-37A..........                     10,861                    -10,000                         861
                   Program                                                  [-10,000]
                   decrease.
               TRAINER
                AIRCRAFT
034            GLIDER MODS....                        134                                                    134
035            T-6............                     17,968                                                 17,968
036            T-1............                     23,706                                                 23,706
037            T-38...........                     30,604                                                 30,604
               OTHER AIRCRAFT
038            U-2 MODS.......                     22,095                                                 22,095
039            KC-10A (ATCA)..                      5,611                                                  5,611
040            C-12...........                      1,980                                                  1,980
042            VC-25A MOD.....                     98,231                                                 98,231
043            C-40...........                     13,171                                                 13,171
044            C-130..........                      7,048                     73,200                      80,248
                   C-130 AMP                                                 [10,000]
                   increase.
                   Eight-                                                    [30,000]
                   Bladed
                   Propeller.
                   T-56 3.5                                                  [33,200]
                   Engine Mod.
045            C-130J MODS....                     29,713                                                 29,713
046            C-135..........                     49,043                                                 49,043
047            COMPASS CALL                        68,415                     28,700                      97,115
                MODS.
                   EC-130H                                                   [28,700]
                   Force
                   Structure
                   Restoration.
048            RC-135.........                    156,165                                                156,165
049            E-3............                     13,178                                                 13,178
050            E-4............                     23,937                                                 23,937
051            E-8............                     18,001                                                 18,001
052            AIRBORNE                           183,308                                                183,308
                WARNING AND
                CONTROL SYSTEM.
053            FAMILY OF                           44,163                    -10,000                      34,163
                BEYOND LINE-OF-
                SIGHT
                TERMINALS.
                   Program                                                  [-10,000]
                   decrease.
054            H-1............                      6,291                                                  6,291
055            UH-1N                                2,456                                                  2,456
                REPLACEMENT.
056            H-60...........                     45,731                                                 45,731
057            RQ-4 MODS......                     50,022                                                 50,022
058            HC/MC-130                           21,660                                                 21,660
                MODIFICATIONS.
059            OTHER AIRCRAFT.                    117,767                                                117,767
060            MQ-1 MODS......                      3,173                                                  3,173
061            MQ-9 MODS......                    115,226                                                115,226
063            CV-22 MODS.....                     58,828                                                 58,828
               AIRCRAFT SPARES
                AND REPAIR
                PARTS
064            INITIAL SPARES/                    656,242                                                656,242
                REPAIR PARTS.
               COMMON SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT
065            AIRCRAFT                            33,716                                                 33,716
                REPLACEMENT
                SUPPORT EQUIP.
               POST PRODUCTION
                SUPPORT
067            B-2A...........                     38,837                                                 38,837
068            B-52...........                      5,911                                                  5,911
069            C-17A..........                     30,108                                                 30,108
070            CV-22 POST                           3,353                                                  3,353
                PRODUCTION
                SUPPORT.
071            C-135..........                      4,490                                                  4,490
072            F-15...........                      3,225                                                  3,225
073            F-16...........                     14,969                     18,700                      33,669
                   Additional                                                [24,700]
                   Mission
                   Trainers.
                   Unobligated                                               [-6,000]
                   balances.
074            F-22A..........                        971                                                    971
076            MQ-9...........                      5,000                                                  5,000
               INDUSTRIAL
                PREPAREDNESS
077            INDUSTRIAL                          18,802                                                 18,802
                RESPONSIVENESS.
               WAR CONSUMABLES
078            WAR CONSUMABLES                    156,465                                                156,465
               OTHER
                PRODUCTION
                CHARGES
079            OTHER                            1,052,814                                              1,052,814
                PRODUCTION
                CHARGES.
               CLASSIFIED
                PROGRAMS
079A           CLASSIFIED                          42,503                                                 42,503
                PROGRAMS.
                    TOTAL             193      15,657,769          1         290,500         194      15,948,269
                    AIRCRAFT
                    PROCUREMEN
                    T, AIR
                    FORCE.
 
               MISSILE
                PROCUREMENT,
                AIR FORCE
               MISSILE
                REPLACEMENT
                EQUIPMENT--BAL
                LISTIC
001            MISSILE                             94,040                                                 94,040
                REPLACEMENT EQ-
                BALLISTIC.
               TACTICAL
003            JOINT AIR-             360         440,578                                    360         440,578
                SURFACE
                STANDOFF
                MISSILE.
004            SIDEWINDER (AIM-       506         200,777                                    506         200,777
                9X).
005            AMRAAM.........        262         390,112                                    262         390,112
006            PREDATOR             3,756         423,016                                  3,756         423,016
                HELLFIRE
                MISSILE.
007            SMALL DIAMETER       1,942         133,697                                  1,942         133,697
                BOMB.
               INDUSTRIAL
                FACILITIES
008            INDUSTR'L                              397                                                    397
                PREPAREDNS/POL
                PREVENTION.
               CLASS IV
009            MM III                              50,517                                                 50,517
                MODIFICATIONS.
010            AGM-65D                              9,639                                                  9,639
                MAVERICK.
011            AGM-88A HARM...                        197                                                    197
012            AIR LAUNCH                          25,019                                                 25,019
                CRUISE MISSILE
                (ALCM).
               MISSILE SPARES
                AND REPAIR
                PARTS
014            INITIAL SPARES/                     48,523                                                 48,523
                REPAIR PARTS.
               SPECIAL
                PROGRAMS
028            SPECIAL UPDATE                     276,562                                                276,562
                PROGRAMS.
               CLASSIFIED
                PROGRAMS
028A           CLASSIFIED                         893,971                                                893,971
                PROGRAMS.
                    TOTAL           6,826       2,987,045                                  6,826       2,987,045
                    MISSILE
                    PROCUREMEN
                    T, AIR
                    FORCE.
 
               SPACE
                PROCUREMENT,
                AIR FORCE
               SPACE PROGRAMS
001            ADVANCED EHF...                    333,366                                                333,366
002            WIDEBAND                            53,476                     26,000                      79,476
                GAPFILLER
                SATELLITES(SPA
                CE).
                   SATCOM                                                    [26,000]
                   Pathfinder.
003            GPS III SPACE            1         199,218                                      1         199,218
                SEGMENT.
004            SPACEBORNE                          18,362                                                 18,362
                EQUIP (COMSEC).
005            GLOBAL                              66,135                                                 66,135
                POSITIONING
                (SPACE).
006            DEF                                 89,351                                                 89,351
                METEOROLOGICAL
                SAT
                PROG(SPACE).
007            EVOLVED                            571,276                                                571,276
                EXPENDABLE
                LAUNCH
                CAPABILITY.
008            EVOLVED                  5         800,201                                      5         800,201
                EXPENDABLE
                LAUNCH
                VEH(SPACE).
009            SBIR HIGH                          452,676                                                452,676
                (SPACE).
                    TOTAL               6       2,584,061                     26,000           6       2,610,061
                    SPACE
                    PROCUREMEN
                    T, AIR
                    FORCE.
 
               PROCUREMENT OF
                AMMUNITION,
                AIR FORCE
               ROCKETS
001            ROCKETS........                     23,788                                                 23,788
               CARTRIDGES
002            CARTRIDGES.....                    131,102                                                131,102
               BOMBS
003            PRACTICE BOMBS.                     89,759                                                 89,759
004            GENERAL PURPOSE                    637,181                                                637,181
                BOMBS.
005            MASSIVE                             39,690                                                 39,690
                ORDNANCE
                PENETRATOR
                (MOP).
006            JOINT DIRECT         6,341         374,688                    -20,000       6,341         354,688
                ATTACK
                MUNITION.
                   Program                                                  [-20,000]
                   reduction.
               OTHER ITEMS
007            CAD/PAD........                     58,266                                                 58,266
008            EXPLOSIVE                            5,612                                                  5,612
                ORDNANCE
                DISPOSAL (EOD).
009            SPARES AND                             103                                                    103
                REPAIR PARTS.
010            MODIFICATIONS..                      1,102                                                  1,102
011            ITEMS LESS THAN                      3,044                                                  3,044
                $5 MILLION.
               FLARES
012            FLARES.........                    120,935                                                120,935
               FUZES
013            FUZES..........                    213,476                                                213,476
               SMALL ARMS
014            SMALL ARMS.....                     60,097                                                 60,097
                    TOTAL           6,341       1,758,843                    -20,000       6,341       1,738,843
                    PROCUREMEN
                    T OF
                    AMMUNITION
                    , AIR
                    FORCE.
 
               OTHER
                PROCUREMENT,
                AIR FORCE
               PASSENGER
                CARRYING
                VEHICLES
001            PASSENGER                            8,834                                                  8,834
                CARRYING
                VEHICLES.
               CARGO AND
                UTILITY
                VEHICLES
002            MEDIUM TACTICAL                     58,160                                                 58,160
                VEHICLE.
003            CAP VEHICLES...                        977                                                    977
004            ITEMS LESS THAN                     12,483                                                 12,483
                $5 MILLION.
               SPECIAL PURPOSE
                VEHICLES
005            SECURITY AND                         4,728                                                  4,728
                TACTICAL
                VEHICLES.
006            ITEMS LESS THAN                      4,662                                                  4,662
                $5 MILLION.
               FIRE FIGHTING
                EQUIPMENT
007            FIRE FIGHTING/                      10,419                                                 10,419
                CRASH RESCUE
                VEHICLES.
               MATERIALS
                HANDLING
                EQUIPMENT
008            ITEMS LESS THAN                     23,320                                                 23,320
                $5 MILLION.
               BASE
                MAINTENANCE
                SUPPORT
009            RUNWAY SNOW                          6,215                                                  6,215
                REMOV &
                CLEANING EQUIP.
010            ITEMS LESS THAN                     87,781                                                 87,781
                $5 MILLION.
               COMM SECURITY
                EQUIPMENT(COMS
                EC)
011            COMSEC                             136,998                                                136,998
                EQUIPMENT.
012            MODIFICATIONS                          677                                                    677
                (COMSEC).
               INTELLIGENCE
                PROGRAMS
013            INTELLIGENCE                         4,041                                                  4,041
                TRAINING
                EQUIPMENT.
014            INTELLIGENCE                        22,573                                                 22,573
                COMM EQUIPMENT.
015            MISSION                             14,456                                                 14,456
                PLANNING
                SYSTEMS.
               ELECTRONICS
                PROGRAMS
016            AIR TRAFFIC                         31,823                                                 31,823
                CONTROL &
                LANDING SYS.
017            NATIONAL                             5,833                                                  5,833
                AIRSPACE
                SYSTEM.
018            BATTLE CONTROL                       1,687                                                  1,687
                SYSTEM--FIXED.
019            THEATER AIR                         22,710                                                 22,710
                CONTROL SYS
                IMPROVEMENTS.
020            WEATHER                             21,561                                                 21,561
                OBSERVATION
                FORECAST.
021            STRATEGIC                          286,980                                                286,980
                COMMAND AND
                CONTROL.
022            CHEYENNE                            36,186                                                 36,186
                MOUNTAIN
                COMPLEX.
024            INTEGRATED                           9,597                                                  9,597
                STRAT PLAN &
                ANALY NETWORK
                (ISPAN).
               SPCL COMM-
                ELECTRONICS
                PROJECTS
025            GENERAL                             27,403                                                 27,403
                INFORMATION
                TECHNOLOGY.
026            AF GLOBAL                            7,212                                                  7,212
                COMMAND &
                CONTROL SYS.
027            MOBILITY                            11,062                                                 11,062
                COMMAND AND
                CONTROL.
028            AIR FORCE                          131,269                                                131,269
                PHYSICAL
                SECURITY
                SYSTEM.
029            COMBAT TRAINING                     33,606                                                 33,606
                RANGES.
030            MINIMUM                              5,232                                                  5,232
                ESSENTIAL
                EMERGENCY COMM
                N.
031            C3                                   7,453                                                  7,453
                COUNTERMEASURE
                S.
032            INTEGRATED                           3,976                                                  3,976
                PERSONNEL AND
                PAY SYSTEM.
033            GCSS-AF FOS....                     25,515                                                 25,515
034            DEFENSE                              9,255                                                  9,255
                ENTERPRISE
                ACCOUNTING AND
                MGMT SYSTEM.
035            THEATER BATTLE                       7,523                                                  7,523
                MGT C2 SYSTEM.
036            AIR & SPACE                         12,043                                                 12,043
                OPERATIONS CTR-
                WPN SYS.
037            AIR OPERATIONS                      24,246                                                 24,246
                CENTER (AOC)
                10.2.
               AIR FORCE
                COMMUNICATIONS
038            INFORMATION                         74,621                                                 74,621
                TRANSPORT
                SYSTEMS.
039            AFNET..........                    103,748                                                103,748
041            JOINT                                5,199                                                  5,199
                COMMUNICATIONS
                SUPPORT
                ELEMENT (JCSE).
042            USCENTCOM......                     15,780                                                 15,780
               SPACE PROGRAMS
043            FAMILY OF                           79,592                    -15,000                      64,592
                BEYOND LINE-OF-
                SIGHT
                TERMINALS.
                   Program                                                  [-15,000]
                   decrease.
044            SPACE BASED IR                      90,190                                                 90,190
                SENSOR PGM
                SPACE.
045            NAVSTAR GPS                          2,029                                                  2,029
                SPACE.
046            NUDET DETECTION                      5,095                                                  5,095
                SYS SPACE.
047            AF SATELLITE                        76,673                                                 76,673
                CONTROL
                NETWORK SPACE.
048            SPACELIFT RANGE                    113,275                                                113,275
                SYSTEM SPACE.
049            MILSATCOM SPACE                     35,495                                                 35,495
050            SPACE MODS                          23,435                                                 23,435
                SPACE.
051            COUNTERSPACE                        43,065                                                 43,065
                SYSTEM.
               ORGANIZATION
                AND BASE
052            TACTICAL C-E                        77,538                     33,900                     111,438
                EQUIPMENT.
                   Battlefield                                               [19,900]
                   Airmen Kits
                   Unfunded
                   Requirement.
                   Joint                                                     [14,000]
                   Terminal
                   Control
                   Training
                   Simulation
                   Unfunded
                   Requirement.
054            RADIO EQUIPMENT                      8,400                                                  8,400
055            CCTV/                                6,144                                                  6,144
                AUDIOVISUAL
                EQUIPMENT.
056            BASE COMM                           77,010                                                 77,010
                INFRASTRUCTURE.
               MODIFICATIONS
057            COMM ELECT MODS                     71,800                                                 71,800
               PERSONAL SAFETY
                & RESCUE EQUIP
058            NIGHT VISION                         2,370                                                  2,370
                GOGGLES.
059            ITEMS LESS THAN                     79,623                                                 79,623
                $5 MILLION.
               DEPOT
                PLANT+MTRLS
                HANDLING EQ
060            MECHANIZED                           7,249                                                  7,249
                MATERIAL
                HANDLING EQUIP.
               BASE SUPPORT
                EQUIPMENT
061            BASE PROCURED                        9,095                      4,000                      13,095
                EQUIPMENT.
                   Additional                                                 [4,000]
                   Equipment.
062            ENGINEERING AND                     17,866                                                 17,866
                EOD EQUIPMENT.
064            MOBILITY                            61,850                                                 61,850
                EQUIPMENT.
065            ITEMS LESS THAN                     30,477                                                 30,477
                $5 MILLION.
               SPECIAL SUPPORT
                PROJECTS
067            DARP RC135.....                     25,072                                                 25,072
068            DCGS-AF........                    183,021                                                183,021
070            SPECIAL UPDATE                     629,371                                                629,371
                PROGRAM.
071            DEFENSE SPACE                      100,663                                                100,663
                RECONNAISSANCE
                PROG..
               CLASSIFIED
                PROGRAMS
071A           CLASSIFIED                      15,038,333                                             15,038,333
                PROGRAMS.
               SPARES AND
                REPAIR PARTS
073            SPARES AND                          59,863                                                 59,863
                REPAIR PARTS.
                    TOTAL                      18,272,438                     22,900                  18,295,338
                    OTHER
                    PROCUREMEN
                    T, AIR
                    FORCE.
 
               PROCUREMENT,
                DEFENSE-WIDE
               MAJOR
                EQUIPMENT,
                DCAA
001            ITEMS LESS THAN                      1,488                                                  1,488
                $5 MILLION.
               MAJOR
                EQUIPMENT,
                DCMA
002            MAJOR EQUIPMENT                      2,494                                                  2,494
               MAJOR
                EQUIPMENT,
                DHRA
003            PERSONNEL                            9,341                                                  9,341
                ADMINISTRATION.
               MAJOR
                EQUIPMENT,
                DISA
007            INFORMATION                          8,080                     15,000                      23,080
                SYSTEMS
                SECURITY.
                   SHARKSEER..                                               [15,000]
008            TELEPORT                            62,789                                                 62,789
                PROGRAM.
009            ITEMS LESS THAN                      9,399                                                  9,399
                $5 MILLION.
010            NET CENTRIC                          1,819                                                  1,819
                ENTERPRISE
                SERVICES
                (NCES).
011            DEFENSE                            141,298                                                141,298
                INFORMATION
                SYSTEM NETWORK.
012            CYBER SECURITY                      12,732                                                 12,732
                INITIATIVE.
013            WHITE HOUSE                         64,098                                                 64,098
                COMMUNICATION
                AGENCY.
014            SENIOR                             617,910                                                617,910
                LEADERSHIP
                ENTERPRISE.
015            JOINT                               84,400                                                 84,400
                INFORMATION
                ENVIRONMENT.
               MAJOR
                EQUIPMENT, DLA
016            MAJOR EQUIPMENT                      5,644                                                  5,644
               MAJOR
                EQUIPMENT,
                DMACT
017            MAJOR EQUIPMENT          4          11,208                                      4          11,208
               MAJOR
                EQUIPMENT,
                DODEA
018            AUTOMATION/                          1,298                                                  1,298
                EDUCATIONAL
                SUPPORT &
                LOGISTICS.
               MAJOR
                EQUIPMENT,
                DEFENSE
                SECURITY
                COOPERATION
                AGENCY
               MAJOR
                EQUIPMENT, DSS
020            MAJOR EQUIPMENT                      1,048                                                  1,048
               MAJOR
                EQUIPMENT,
                DEFENSE THREAT
                REDUCTION
                AGENCY
021            VEHICLES.......                        100                                                    100
022            OTHER MAJOR                          5,474                                                  5,474
                EQUIPMENT.
               MAJOR
                EQUIPMENT,
                MISSILE
                DEFENSE AGENCY
023            THAAD..........         30         464,067                                     30         464,067
024            AEGIS BMD......         40         558,916         18         120,445          58         679,361
                   SM-3 Block                                    [9]        [117,880]
                   IB.
                   SM-3 Block                                    [9]          [2,565]
                   IB
                   (Canisters).
025               ADVANCE                         147,765                   -147,765                           0
                  PROCUREMENT
                  (CY).
                   SM-3 Block                                              [-147,765]
                   IB.
026            BMDS AN/TPY-2                       78,634                                                 78,634
                RADARS.
027            AEGIS ASHORE                        30,587                                                 30,587
                PHASE III.
028            IRON DOME......          1          55,000                                      1          55,000
               MAJOR
                EQUIPMENT, NSA
035            INFORMATION                         37,177                                                 37,177
                SYSTEMS
                SECURITY
                PROGRAM (ISSP).
               MAJOR
                EQUIPMENT, OSD
036            MAJOR                   17          46,939                                     17          46,939
                EQUIPMENT, OSD.
               MAJOR
                EQUIPMENT, TJS
038            MAJOR                               13,027                                                 13,027
                EQUIPMENT, TJS.
               MAJOR
                EQUIPMENT, WHS
040            MAJOR                               27,859                                                 27,859
                EQUIPMENT, WHS.
               MAJOR
                EQUIPMENT,
                MISSILE
                DEFENSE AGENCY
028A           DAVID SLING....                                     1         150,000           1         150,000
                   David's                                       [1]        [150,000]
                   Sling
                   Weapon
                   System
                   Procurement
                   -Subject to
                   Title XVI.
028B           ARROW 3........                                     1          15,000           1          15,000
                   Arrow 3                                       [1]         [15,000]
                   Upper Tier
                   Procurement
                   -Subject to
                   Title XVI.
               CLASSIFIED
                PROGRAMS
040A           CLASSIFIED                         617,757                                                617,757
                PROGRAMS.
               AVIATION
                PROGRAMS
041            MC-12..........                     63,170                                                 63,170
042            ROTARY WING                        135,985                                                135,985
                UPGRADES AND
                SUSTAINMENT.
044            NON-STANDARD                        61,275                                                 61,275
                AVIATION.
047            RQ-11 UNMANNED                      20,087                                                 20,087
                AERIAL VEHICLE.
048            CV-22                               18,832                                                 18,832
                MODIFICATION.
049            MQ-1 UNMANNED                        1,934                                                  1,934
                AERIAL VEHICLE.
050            MQ-9 UNMANNED                       11,726                     15,200                      26,926
                AERIAL VEHICLE.
                   Medium                                                    [15,200]
                   Altitude
                   Long
                   Endurance
                   Tactical
                   (MALET) MQ-
                   9 Unmanned
                   Aerial
                   Vehicle.
051            STUASL0........                      1,514                                                  1,514
052            PRECISION                          204,105                                                204,105
                STRIKE PACKAGE.
053            AC/MC-130J.....                     61,368                    -35,400                      25,968
                   MC-130                                                   [-35,400]
                   Terrain
                   Following/
                   Terrain
                   Avoidance
                   Radar
                   Program.
054            C-130                               66,861                                                 66,861
                MODIFICATIONS.
               SHIPBUILDING
055            UNDERWATER                          32,521                                                 32,521
                SYSTEMS.
               AMMUNITION
                PROGRAMS
056            ORDNANCE ITEMS                     174,734                                                174,734
                <$5M.
               OTHER
                PROCUREMENT
                PROGRAMS
057            INTELLIGENCE                        93,009                                                 93,009
                SYSTEMS.
058            DISTRIBUTED                         14,964                                                 14,964
                COMMON GROUND/
                SURFACE
                SYSTEMS.
059            OTHER ITEMS                         79,149                                                 79,149
                <$5M.
060            COMBATANT CRAFT                     33,362                                                 33,362
                SYSTEMS.
061            SPECIAL                            143,533                                                143,533
                PROGRAMS.
062            TACTICAL                            73,520                                                 73,520
                VEHICLES.
063            WARRIOR SYSTEMS                    186,009                                                186,009
                <$5M.
064            COMBAT MISSION                      19,693                                                 19,693
                REQUIREMENTS.
065            GLOBAL VIDEO                         3,967                                                  3,967
                SURVEILLANCE
                ACTIVITIES.
066            OPERATIONAL                         19,225                                                 19,225
                ENHANCEMENTS
                INTELLIGENCE.
068            OPERATIONAL                        213,252                                                213,252
                ENHANCEMENTS.
               CBDP
074            CHEMICAL                           141,223                                                141,223
                BIOLOGICAL
                SITUATIONAL
                AWARENESS.
075            CB PROTECTION &                    137,487                                                137,487
                HAZARD
                MITIGATION.
                    TOTAL              92       5,130,853         20         132,480         112       5,263,333
                    PROCUREMEN
                    T, DEFENSE-
                    WIDE.
 
               JOINT URGENT
                OPERATIONAL
                NEEDS FUND
               JOINT URGENT
                OPERATIONAL
                NEEDS FUND
001            JOINT URGENT                        99,701                    -99,701                           0
                OPERATIONAL
                NEEDS FUND.
                   Program                                                  [-99,701]
                   reduction.
                    TOTAL                          99,701                    -99,701                           0
                    JOINT
                    URGENT
                    OPERATIONA
                    L NEEDS
                    FUND.
 
                    TOTAL          22,785     106,967,393      1,158       2,768,306      23,943     109,735,699
                    PROCUREMEN
                    T.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SEC. 4102. PROCUREMENT FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  SEC. 4102. PROCUREMENT FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           FY 2016 Request               House Change              House Authorized
              Line                              Item                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Qty          Cost           Qty           Cost           Qty          Cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY
                                 FIXED WING
003                              AERIAL COMMON SENSOR (ACS) (MIP)..           5          99,500                                        5          99,500
004                              MQ-1 UAV..........................           2          16,537                                        2          16,537
                                 MODIFICATION OF AIRCRAFT
016                              MQ-1 PAYLOAD (MIP)................                       8,700                                                    8,700
023                              ARL SEMA MODS (MIP)...............                      32,000                                                   32,000
031                              RQ-7 UAV MODS.....................                       8,250                                                    8,250
                                      TOTAL AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT,             7         164,987                                        7         164,987
                                      ARMY.
 
                                 MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY
                                 AIR-TO-SURFACE MISSILE SYSTEM
003                              HELLFIRE SYS SUMMARY..............         270          37,260                                      270          37,260
                                      TOTAL MISSILE PROCUREMENT,            270          37,260                                      270          37,260
                                      ARMY.
 
                                 PROCUREMENT OF W&TCV, ARMY
                                 WEAPONS & OTHER COMBAT VEHICLES
016                              MORTAR SYSTEMS....................                       7,030                                                    7,030
021                              COMMON REMOTELY OPERATED WEAPONS                        19,000                                                   19,000
                                  STATION.
                                      TOTAL PROCUREMENT OF W&TCV,                        26,030                                                   26,030
                                      ARMY.
 
                                 PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY
                                 SMALL/MEDIUM CAL AMMUNITION
004                              CTG, .50 CAL, ALL TYPES...........                       4,000                                                    4,000
                                 MORTAR AMMUNITION
008                              60MM MORTAR, ALL TYPES............                      11,700                                                   11,700
009                              81MM MORTAR, ALL TYPES............                       4,000                                                    4,000
010                              120MM MORTAR, ALL TYPES...........                       7,000                                                    7,000
                                 ARTILLERY AMMUNITION
012                              ARTILLERY CARTRIDGES, 75MM &                             5,000                                                    5,000
                                  105MM, ALL TYPES.
013                              ARTILLERY PROJECTILE, 155MM, ALL                        10,000                                                   10,000
                                  TYPES.
015                              ARTILLERY PROPELLANTS, FUZES AND                         2,000                                                    2,000
                                  PRIMERS, ALL.
                                 ROCKETS
017                              ROCKET, HYDRA 70, ALL TYPES.......                     136,340                                                  136,340
                                 OTHER AMMUNITION
019                              DEMOLITION MUNITIONS, ALL TYPES...                       4,000                                                    4,000
021                              SIGNALS, ALL TYPES................                       8,000                                                    8,000
                                      TOTAL PROCUREMENT OF                              192,040                                                  192,040
                                      AMMUNITION, ARMY.
 
                                 OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY
                                 TACTICAL VEHICLES
005                              FAMILY OF MEDIUM TACTICAL VEH            1,191         243,998                                    1,191         243,998
                                  (FMTV).
009                              HVY EXPANDED MOBILE TACTICAL TRUCK                     223,276                                                  223,276
                                  EXT SERV.
011                              MODIFICATION OF IN SVC EQUIP......                     130,000                                                  130,000
012                              MINE-RESISTANT AMBUSH-PROTECTED                        393,100                                                  393,100
                                  (MRAP) MODS.
                                 COMM--SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS
021                              TRANSPORTABLE TACTICAL COMMAND                           5,724                                                    5,724
                                  COMMUNICATIONS.
                                 COMM--BASE COMMUNICATIONS
051                              INSTALLATION INFO INFRASTRUCTURE                        29,500                                                   29,500
                                  MOD PROGRAM.
                                 ELECT EQUIP--TACT INT REL ACT
                                  (TIARA)
057                              DCGS-A (MIP)......................                      54,140                                                   54,140
059                              TROJAN (MIP)......................                       6,542                                                    6,542
061                              CI HUMINT AUTO REPRTING AND                              3,860                                                    3,860
                                  COLL(CHARCS).
                                 ELECT EQUIP--ELECTRONIC WARFARE
                                  (EW)
068                              FAMILY OF PERSISTENT SURVEILLANCE                       14,847                                                   14,847
                                  CAPABILITIE.
069                              COUNTERINTELLIGENCE/SECURITY                            19,535                                                   19,535
                                  COUNTERMEASURES.
                                 ELECT EQUIP--TACTICAL SURV. (TAC
                                  SURV)
084                              COMPUTER BALLISTICS: LHMBC XM32...                       2,601                                                    2,601
                                 ELECT EQUIP--TACTICAL C2 SYSTEMS
087                              FIRE SUPPORT C2 FAMILY............                          48                                                       48
094                              MANEUVER CONTROL SYSTEM (MCS).....                         252                                                      252
                                 ELECT EQUIP--AUTOMATION
101                              AUTOMATED DATA PROCESSING EQUIP...                         652                                                      652
                                 CHEMICAL DEFENSIVE EQUIPMENT
111                              BASE DEFENSE SYSTEMS (BDS)........                       4,035                                                    4,035
                                 COMBAT SERVICE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
131                              FORCE PROVIDER....................          12          53,800                                       12          53,800
133                              CARGO AERIAL DEL & PERSONNEL                               700                                                      700
                                  PARACHUTE SYSTEM.
                                 MATERIAL HANDLING EQUIPMENT
159                              FAMILY OF FORKLIFTS...............                      10,486                                                   10,486
                                 OTHER SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
169                              RAPID EQUIPPING SOLDIER SUPPORT                          8,500                                                    8,500
                                  EQUIPMENT.
                                      TOTAL OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY       1,203       1,205,596                                    1,203       1,205,596
 
                                 JOINT IMPR EXPLOSIVE DEV DEFEAT
                                  FUND
                                 NETWORK ATTACK
001                              ATTACK THE NETWORK................                     219,550                                                  219,550
                                 JIEDDO DEVICE DEFEAT
002                              DEFEAT THE DEVICE.................                      77,600                                                   77,600
                                 FORCE TRAINING
003                              TRAIN THE FORCE...................                       7,850                                                    7,850
                                 STAFF AND INFRASTRUCTURE
004                              OPERATIONS........................                     188,271                     -50,700                      137,571
                                     Program Reduction.............                                                [-50,700]
                                      TOTAL JOINT IMPR EXPLOSIVE                        493,271                     -50,700                      442,571
                                      DEV DEFEAT FUND.
 
                                 AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY
                                 OTHER AIRCRAFT
026                              STUASL0 UAV.......................           3          55,000                                        3          55,000
                                 MODIFICATION OF AIRCRAFT
030                              AV-8 SERIES.......................                      41,365                                                   41,365
032                              F-18 SERIES.......................                       8,000                                                    8,000
037                              EP-3 SERIES.......................                       6,300                                                    6,300
047                              SPECIAL PROJECT AIRCRAFT..........                      14,198                                                   14,198
051                              COMMON ECM EQUIPMENT..............                      72,700                                                   72,700
052                              COMMON AVIONICS CHANGES...........                      13,988                                                   13,988
059                              V-22 (TILT/ROTOR ACFT) OSPREY.....                       4,900                                                    4,900
                                 AIRCRAFT SUPPORT EQUIP &
                                  FACILITIES
065                              AIRCRAFT INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES....                         943                                                      943
                                      TOTAL AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT,             3         217,394                                        3         217,394
                                      NAVY.
 
                                 WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY
                                 TACTICAL MISSILES
010                              LASER MAVERICK....................                       3,344                                                    3,344
                                      TOTAL WEAPONS PROCUREMENT,                          3,344                                                    3,344
                                      NAVY.
 
                                 PROCUREMENT OF AMMO, NAVY & MC
                                 NAVY AMMUNITION
001                              GENERAL PURPOSE BOMBS.............                       9,715                                                    9,715
002                              AIRBORNE ROCKETS, ALL TYPES.......                      11,108                                                   11,108
003                              MACHINE GUN AMMUNITION............                       3,603                                                    3,603
006                              AIR EXPENDABLE COUNTERMEASURES....                      11,982                                                   11,982
011                              OTHER SHIP GUN AMMUNITION.........                       4,674                                                    4,674
012                              SMALL ARMS & LANDING PARTY AMMO...                       3,456                                                    3,456
013                              PYROTECHNIC AND DEMOLITION........                       1,989                                                    1,989
014                              AMMUNITION LESS THAN $5 MILLION...                       4,674                                                    4,674
                                 MARINE CORPS AMMUNITION
020                              120MM, ALL TYPES..................                      10,719                                                   10,719
023                              ROCKETS, ALL TYPES................                       3,993                                                    3,993
024                              ARTILLERY, ALL TYPES..............                      67,200                                                   67,200
025                              DEMOLITION MUNITIONS, ALL TYPES...                         518                                                      518
026                              FUZE, ALL TYPES...................                       3,299                                                    3,299
                                      TOTAL PROCUREMENT OF AMMO,                        136,930                                                  136,930
                                      NAVY & MC.
 
                                 OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY
                                 CIVIL ENGINEERING SUPPORT
                                  EQUIPMENT
135                              PASSENGER CARRYING VEHICLES.......                         186                                                      186
                                 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
160A                             CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...............                      12,000                                                   12,000
                                      TOTAL OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY                      12,186                                                   12,186
 
                                 PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS
                                 GUIDED MISSILES
010                              JAVELIN...........................                       7,679                                                    7,679
                                 OTHER SUPPORT
013                              MODIFICATION KITS.................                      10,311                                                   10,311
                                 COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEMS
014                              UNIT OPERATIONS CENTER............                       8,221                                                    8,221
                                 OTHER SUPPORT (TEL)
018                              MODIFICATION KITS.................                       3,600                                                    3,600
                                 COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEM (NON-
                                  TEL)
019                              ITEMS UNDER $5 MILLION (COMM &                           8,693                                                    8,693
                                  ELEC).
                                 INTELL/COMM EQUIPMENT (NON-TEL)
027                              RQ-11 UAV.........................                       3,430                                                    3,430
                                 MATERIALS HANDLING EQUIPMENT
052                              PHYSICAL SECURITY EQUIPMENT.......                       7,000                                                    7,000
                                      TOTAL PROCUREMENT, MARINE                          48,934                                                   48,934
                                      CORPS.
 
                                 AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE
                                 OTHER AIRCRAFT
015                              MQ-9..............................                      13,500                                                   13,500
                                 OTHER AIRCRAFT
044                              C-130.............................                       1,410                                                    1,410
056                              H-60..............................                      39,300                                                   39,300
058                              HC/MC-130 MODIFICATIONS...........                       5,690                                                    5,690
061                              MQ-9 MODS.........................                      69,000                                                   69,000
                                      TOTAL AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT,                       128,900                                                  128,900
                                      AIR FORCE.
 
                                 MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE
                                 TACTICAL
006                              PREDATOR HELLFIRE MISSILE.........       1,811         280,902                                    1,811         280,902
007                              SMALL DIAMETER BOMB...............          63           2,520                                       63           2,520
                                 CLASS IV
010                              AGM-65D MAVERICK..................                       5,720                                                    5,720
                                      TOTAL MISSILE PROCUREMENT,          1,874         289,142                                    1,874         289,142
                                      AIR FORCE.
 
                                 PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR
                                  FORCE
                                 CARTRIDGES
002                              CARTRIDGES........................                       8,371                                                    8,371
                                 BOMBS
004                              GENERAL PURPOSE BOMBS.............                      17,031                                                   17,031
006                              JOINT DIRECT ATTACK MUNITION......       5,953         184,412                                    5,953         184,412
                                 FLARES
012                              FLARES............................                      11,064                                                   11,064
                                 FUZES
013                              FUZES.............................                       7,996                                                    7,996
                                      TOTAL PROCUREMENT OF                5,953         228,874                                    5,953         228,874
                                      AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE.
 
                                 OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE
                                 SPCL COMM-ELECTRONICS PROJECTS
025                              GENERAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY....                       3,953                                                    3,953
027                              MOBILITY COMMAND AND CONTROL......                       2,000                                                    2,000
                                 AIR FORCE COMMUNICATIONS
042                              USCENTCOM.........................                      10,000                                                   10,000
                                 ORGANIZATION AND BASE
052                              TACTICAL C-E EQUIPMENT............                       4,065                                                    4,065
056                              BASE COMM INFRASTRUCTURE..........                      15,400                                                   15,400
                                 PERSONAL SAFETY & RESCUE EQUIP
058                              NIGHT VISION GOGGLES..............                       3,580                                                    3,580
059                              ITEMS LESS THAN $5 MILLION........                       3,407                                                    3,407
                                 BASE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
062                              ENGINEERING AND EOD EQUIPMENT.....                      46,790                                                   46,790
064                              MOBILITY EQUIPMENT................                         400                                                      400
065                              ITEMS LESS THAN $5 MILLION........                       9,800                                                    9,800
                                 SPECIAL SUPPORT PROJECTS
071                              DEFENSE SPACE RECONNAISSANCE PROG.                      28,070                                                   28,070
                                 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
071A                             CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...............                   3,732,499                                                3,732,499
                                      TOTAL OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR                    3,859,964                                                3,859,964
                                      FORCE.
 
                                 PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE
                                 MAJOR EQUIPMENT, DISA
008                              TELEPORT PROGRAM..................                       1,940                                                    1,940
                                 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
040A                             CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS...............                      35,482                                                   35,482
                                 AVIATION PROGRAMS
041                              MC-12.............................                       5,000                                                    5,000
                                 AMMUNITION PROGRAMS
056                              ORDNANCE ITEMS <$5M...............     746,066          35,299                                  746,066          35,299
                                 OTHER PROCUREMENT PROGRAMS
061                              SPECIAL PROGRAMS..................           1          15,160                                        1          15,160
063                              WARRIOR SYSTEMS <$5M..............          50          15,000                                       50          15,000
068                              OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS..........           3         104,537                                        3         104,537
                                      TOTAL PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-       746,120         212,418                                  746,120         212,418
                                      WIDE.
 
                                 NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE
                                  EQUIPMENT
                                 UNDISTRIBUTED
007                              MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT...........                                                 250,000                      250,000
                                     NGREA Program Increase........                                                [250,000]
                                      TOTAL NATIONAL GUARD AND                                                      250,000                      250,000
                                      RESERVE EQUIPMENT.
 
                                      TOTAL PROCUREMENT............     755,430       7,257,270                     199,300      755,430       7,456,570
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


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)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     FY 2016                           House
  Line        Program Element                   Item                 Request      House  Change     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         .........................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST
                                     & EVAL, ARMY
         .........................  BASIC RESEARCH
   001   0601101A                   IN-HOUSE LABORATORY                  13,018                           13,018
                                     INDEPENDENT RESEARCH.
   002   0601102A                   DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES..         239,118                          239,118
   003   0601103A                   UNIVERSITY RESEARCH                  72,603                           72,603
                                     INITIATIVES.
   004   0601104A                   UNIVERSITY AND INDUSTRY             100,340                          100,340
                                     RESEARCH CENTERS.
         .........................     SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH.         425,079                          425,079
         .........................
         .........................  APPLIED RESEARCH
   005   0602105A                   MATERIALS TECHNOLOGY.......          28,314                           28,314
   006   0602120A                   SENSORS AND ELECTRONIC               38,374                           38,374
                                     SURVIVABILITY.
   007   0602122A                   TRACTOR HIP................           6,879                            6,879
   008   0602211A                   AVIATION TECHNOLOGY........          56,884                           56,884
   009   0602270A                   ELECTRONIC WARFARE                   19,243                           19,243
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   010   0602303A                   MISSILE TECHNOLOGY.........          45,053           8,000           53,053
         .........................      A2/AD Anti-Ship Missile                          [8,000]
                                        Study.
   011   0602307A                   ADVANCED WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY          29,428                           29,428
   012   0602308A                   ADVANCED CONCEPTS AND                27,862                           27,862
                                     SIMULATION.
   013   0602601A                   COMBAT VEHICLE AND                   68,839                           68,839
                                     AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGY.
   014   0602618A                   BALLISTICS TECHNOLOGY......          92,801                           92,801
   015   0602622A                   CHEMICAL, SMOKE AND                   3,866                            3,866
                                     EQUIPMENT DEFEATING
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   016   0602623A                   JOINT SERVICE SMALL ARMS              5,487                            5,487
                                     PROGRAM.
   017   0602624A                   WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS                48,340                           48,340
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   018   0602705A                   ELECTRONICS AND ELECTRONIC           55,301                           55,301
                                     DEVICES.
   019   0602709A                   NIGHT VISION TECHNOLOGY....          33,807                           33,807
   020   0602712A                   COUNTERMINE SYSTEMS........          25,068                           25,068
   021   0602716A                   HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING            23,681                           23,681
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   022   0602720A                   ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY                20,850                           20,850
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   023   0602782A                   COMMAND, CONTROL,                    36,160                           36,160
                                     COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY.
   024   0602783A                   COMPUTER AND SOFTWARE                12,656                           12,656
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   025   0602784A                   MILITARY ENGINEERING                 63,409                           63,409
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   026   0602785A                   MANPOWER/PERSONNEL/TRAINING          24,735          -5,000           19,735
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
         .........................      Program decrease.......                         [-5,000]
   027   0602786A                   WARFIGHTER TECHNOLOGY......          35,795                           35,795
   028   0602787A                   MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY.........          76,853                           76,853
         .........................     SUBTOTAL APPLIED                 879,685           3,000          882,685
                                       RESEARCH.
         .........................
         .........................  ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                     DEVELOPMENT
   029   0603001A                   WARFIGHTER ADVANCED                  46,973                           46,973
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   030   0603002A                   MEDICAL ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY          69,584                           69,584
   031   0603003A                   AVIATION ADVANCED                    89,736                           89,736
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   032   0603004A                   WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS                57,663                           57,663
                                     ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
   033   0603005A                   COMBAT VEHICLE AND                  113,071                          113,071
                                     AUTOMOTIVE ADVANCED
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   034   0603006A                   SPACE APPLICATION ADVANCED            5,554                            5,554
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   035   0603007A                   MANPOWER, PERSONNEL AND              12,636                           12,636
                                     TRAINING ADVANCED
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   037   0603009A                   TRACTOR HIKE...............           7,502                            7,502
   038   0603015A                   NEXT GENERATION TRAINING &           17,425                           17,425
                                     SIMULATION SYSTEMS.
   039   0603020A                   TRACTOR ROSE...............          11,912                           11,912
   040   0603125A                   COMBATING TERRORISM--                27,520                           27,520
                                     TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   041   0603130A                   TRACTOR NAIL...............           2,381                            2,381
   042   0603131A                   TRACTOR EGGS...............           2,431                            2,431
   043   0603270A                   ELECTRONIC WARFARE                   26,874                           26,874
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   044   0603313A                   MISSILE AND ROCKET ADVANCED          49,449                           49,449
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   045   0603322A                   TRACTOR CAGE...............          10,999                           10,999
   046   0603461A                   HIGH PERFORMANCE COMPUTING          177,159                          177,159
                                     MODERNIZATION PROGRAM.
   047   0603606A                   LANDMINE WARFARE AND                 13,993                           13,993
                                     BARRIER ADVANCED
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   048   0603607A                   JOINT SERVICE SMALL ARMS              5,105                            5,105
                                     PROGRAM.
   049   0603710A                   NIGHT VISION ADVANCED                40,929                           40,929
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   050   0603728A                   ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY                10,727                           10,727
                                     TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATIONS.
   051   0603734A                   MILITARY ENGINEERING                 20,145                           20,145
                                     ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
   052   0603772A                   ADVANCED TACTICAL COMPUTER           38,163                           38,163
                                     SCIENCE AND SENSOR
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   053   0603794A                   C3 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.....          37,816                           37,816
         .........................     SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                895,747                          895,747
                                       TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         .........................
         .........................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                     DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
   054   0603305A                   ARMY MISSLE DEFENSE SYSTEMS          10,347                           10,347
                                     INTEGRATION.
   055   0603308A                   ARMY SPACE SYSTEMS                   25,061                           25,061
                                     INTEGRATION.
   056   0603619A                   LANDMINE WARFARE AND                 49,636                           49,636
                                     BARRIER--ADV DEV.
   057   0603627A                   SMOKE, OBSCURANT AND TARGET          13,426                           13,426
                                     DEFEATING SYS-ADV DEV.
   058   0603639A                   TANK AND MEDIUM CALIBER              46,749                           46,749
                                     AMMUNITION.
   060   0603747A                   SOLDIER SUPPORT AND                   6,258                            6,258
                                     SURVIVABILITY.
   061   0603766A                   TACTICAL ELECTRONIC                  13,472                           13,472
                                     SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM--ADV
                                     DEV.
   062   0603774A                   NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS                  7,292                            7,292
                                     ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT.
   063   0603779A                   ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY                 8,813                            8,813
                                     TECHNOLOGY--DEM/VAL.
   065   0603790A                   NATO RESEARCH AND                       294                              294
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   067   0603804A                   LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER               21,233                           21,233
                                     EQUIPMENT--ADV DEV.
   068   0603807A                   MEDICAL SYSTEMS--ADV DEV...          31,962                           31,962
   069   0603827A                   SOLDIER SYSTEMS--ADVANCED            22,194                           22,194
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   071   0604100A                   ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES...           9,805                            9,805
   072   0604115A                   TECHNOLOGY MATURATION                40,917                           40,917
                                     INITIATIVES.
   073   0604120A                   ASSURED POSITIONING,                 30,058                           30,058
                                     NAVIGATION AND TIMING
                                     (PNT).
   074   0604319A                   INDIRECT FIRE PROTECTION            155,361                          155,361
                                     CAPABILITY INCREMENT 2-
                                     INTERCEPT (IFPC2).
         .........................     SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                492,878                          492,878
                                       COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
                                       PROTOTYPES.
         .........................
         .........................  SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
                                     DEMONSTRATION
   076   0604201A                   AIRCRAFT AVIONICS..........          12,939                           12,939
   078   0604270A                   ELECTRONIC WARFARE                   18,843                           18,843
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   079   0604280A                   JOINT TACTICAL RADIO.......           9,861                            9,861
   080   0604290A                   MID-TIER NETWORKING                   8,763                            8,763
                                     VEHICULAR RADIO (MNVR).
   081   0604321A                   ALL SOURCE ANALYSIS SYSTEM.           4,309                            4,309
   082   0604328A                   TRACTOR CAGE...............          15,138                           15,138
   083   0604601A                   INFANTRY SUPPORT WEAPONS...          74,128           6,500           80,628
         .........................      Army requested                                   [1,500]
                                        realignment.
         .........................      Soldier Enhancement                              [5,000]
                                        Program.
   085   0604611A                   JAVELIN....................           3,945                            3,945
   087   0604633A                   AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL........          10,076                           10,076
   088   0604641A                   TACTICAL UNMANNED GROUND             40,374                           40,374
                                     VEHICLE (TUGV).
   089   0604710A                   NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS--ENG            67,582                           67,582
                                     DEV.
   090   0604713A                   COMBAT FEEDING, CLOTHING,             1,763                            1,763
                                     AND EQUIPMENT.
   091   0604715A                   NON-SYSTEM TRAINING                  27,155                           27,155
                                     DEVICES--ENG DEV.
   092   0604741A                   AIR DEFENSE COMMAND,                 24,569                           24,569
                                     CONTROL AND INTELLIGENCE--
                                     ENG DEV.
   093   0604742A                   CONSTRUCTIVE SIMULATION              23,364                           23,364
                                     SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
   094   0604746A                   AUTOMATIC TEST EQUIPMENT              8,960                            8,960
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   095   0604760A                   DISTRIBUTIVE INTERACTIVE              9,138                            9,138
                                     SIMULATIONS (DIS)--ENG DEV.
   096   0604780A                   COMBINED ARMS TACTICAL               21,622                           21,622
                                     TRAINER (CATT) CORE.
   097   0604798A                   BRIGADE ANALYSIS,                    99,242                           99,242
                                     INTEGRATION AND EVALUATION.
   098   0604802A                   WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS--ENG           21,379                           21,379
                                     DEV.
   099   0604804A                   LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER               48,339                           48,339
                                     EQUIPMENT--ENG DEV.
   100   0604805A                   COMMAND, CONTROL,                     2,726                            2,726
                                     COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS--
                                     ENG DEV.
   101   0604807A                   MEDICAL MATERIEL/MEDICAL             45,412                           45,412
                                     BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE
                                     EQUIPMENT--ENG DEV.
   102   0604808A                   LANDMINE WARFARE/BARRIER--           55,215                           55,215
                                     ENG DEV.
   104   0604818A                   ARMY TACTICAL COMMAND &             163,643                          163,643
                                     CONTROL HARDWARE &
                                     SOFTWARE.
   105   0604820A                   RADAR DEVELOPMENT..........          12,309                           12,309
   106   0604822A                   GENERAL FUND ENTERPRISE              15,700                           15,700
                                     BUSINESS SYSTEM (GFEBS).
   107   0604823A                   FIREFINDER.................           6,243                            6,243
   108   0604827A                   SOLDIER SYSTEMS--WARRIOR             18,776                           18,776
                                     DEM/VAL.
   109   0604854A                   ARTILLERY SYSTEMS--EMD.....           1,953                            1,953
   110   0605013A                   INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY               67,358                           67,358
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   111   0605018A                   INTEGRATED PERSONNEL AND            136,011                          136,011
                                     PAY SYSTEM-ARMY (IPPS-A).
   112   0605028A                   ARMORED MULTI-PURPOSE               230,210                          230,210
                                     VEHICLE (AMPV).
   113   0605030A                   JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK               13,357                           13,357
                                     CENTER (JTNC).
   114   0605031A                   JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK               18,055                           18,055
                                     (JTN).
   115   0605032A                   TRACTOR TIRE...............           5,677                            5,677
   116   0605035A                   COMMON INFRARED                      77,570          24,000          101,570
                                     COUNTERMEASURES (CIRCM).
         .........................      Apache Survivability                            [24,000]
                                        Enhancements--Army
                                        Unfunded Requirement.
   117   0605051A                   AIRCRAFT SURVIVABILITY               18,112          75,000           93,112
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
         .........................      Apache Survivability                            [60,000]
                                        Enhancements--Army
                                        Unfunded Requirement.
         .........................      Concept development by                          [15,000]
                                        the Army of a CPGS
                                        option.
   118   0605350A                   WIN-T INCREMENT 3--FULL              39,700                           39,700
                                     NETWORKING.
   119   0605380A                   AMF JOINT TACTICAL RADIO             12,987                           12,987
                                     SYSTEM (JTRS).
   120   0605450A                   JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND MISSILE          88,866         -20,000           68,866
                                     (JAGM).
         .........................      EMD contract delays....                        [-20,000]
   121   0605456A                   PAC-3/MSE MISSILE..........           2,272                            2,272
   122   0605457A                   ARMY INTEGRATED AIR AND             214,099                          214,099
                                     MISSILE DEFENSE (AIAMD).
   123   0605625A                   MANNED GROUND VEHICLE......          49,247         -10,000           39,247
         .........................      Funding ahead of need..                        [-10,000]
   124   0605626A                   AERIAL COMMON SENSOR.......               2                                2
   125   0605766A                   NATIONAL CAPABILITIES                10,599                           10,599
                                     INTEGRATION (MIP).
   126   0605812A                   JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL                 32,486                           32,486
                                     VEHICLE (JLTV) ENGINEERING
                                     AND MANUFACTURING
                                     DEVELOPMENT PH.
   127   0605830A                   AVIATION GROUND SUPPORT               8,880                            8,880
                                     EQUIPMENT.
   128   0210609A                   PALADIN INTEGRATED                  152,288                          152,288
                                     MANAGEMENT (PIM).
   129   0303032A                   TROJAN--RH12...............           5,022                            5,022
   130   0304270A                   ELECTRONIC WARFARE                   12,686                           12,686
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
         .........................     SUBTOTAL SYSTEM                2,068,950          75,500        2,144,450
                                       DEVELOPMENT &
                                       DEMONSTRATION.
         .........................
         .........................  RDT&E MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
   131   0604256A                   THREAT SIMULATOR                     20,035                           20,035
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   132   0604258A                   TARGET SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.          16,684                           16,684
   133   0604759A                   MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT.......          62,580                           62,580
   134   0605103A                   RAND ARROYO CENTER.........          20,853                           20,853
   135   0605301A                   ARMY KWAJALEIN ATOLL.......         205,145                          205,145
   136   0605326A                   CONCEPTS EXPERIMENTATION             19,430                           19,430
                                     PROGRAM.
   138   0605601A                   ARMY TEST RANGES AND                277,646                          277,646
                                     FACILITIES.
   139   0605602A                   ARMY TECHNICAL TEST                  51,550                           51,550
                                     INSTRUMENTATION AND
                                     TARGETS.
   140   0605604A                   SURVIVABILITY/LETHALITY              33,246                           33,246
                                     ANALYSIS.
   141   0605606A                   AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION.....           4,760                            4,760
   142   0605702A                   METEOROLOGICAL SUPPORT TO             8,303                            8,303
                                     RDT&E ACTIVITIES.
   143   0605706A                   MATERIEL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS..          20,403                           20,403
   144   0605709A                   EXPLOITATION OF FOREIGN              10,396                           10,396
                                     ITEMS.
   145   0605712A                   SUPPORT OF OPERATIONAL               49,337                           49,337
                                     TESTING.
   146   0605716A                   ARMY EVALUATION CENTER.....          52,694                           52,694
   147   0605718A                   ARMY MODELING & SIM X-CMD               938                              938
                                     COLLABORATION & INTEG.
   148   0605801A                   PROGRAMWIDE ACTIVITIES.....          60,319                           60,319
   149   0605803A                   TECHNICAL INFORMATION                28,478                           28,478
                                     ACTIVITIES.
   150   0605805A                   MUNITIONS STANDARDIZATION,           32,604          -8,000           24,604
                                     EFFECTIVENESS AND SAFETY.
         .........................      Program reduction......                         [-8,000]
   151   0605857A                   ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY                 3,186                            3,186
                                     TECHNOLOGY MGMT SUPPORT.
   152   0605898A                   MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D.........          48,955                           48,955
         .........................     SUBTOTAL RDT&E                 1,027,542          -8,000        1,019,542
                                       MANAGEMENT SUPPORT.
         .........................
         .........................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
                                     DEVELOPMENT
   154   0603778A                   MLRS PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT             18,397                           18,397
                                     PROGRAM.
   155   0603813A                   TRACTOR PULL...............           9,461                            9,461
   156   0607131A                   WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS                 4,945                            4,945
                                     PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
                                     PROGRAMS.
   157   0607133A                   TRACTOR SMOKE..............           7,569                            7,569
   158   0607135A                   APACHE PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT           69,862                           69,862
                                     PROGRAM.
   159   0607136A                   BLACKHAWK PRODUCT                    66,653                           66,653
                                     IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
   160   0607137A                   CHINOOK PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT          37,407                           37,407
                                     PROGRAM.
   161   0607138A                   FIXED WING PRODUCT                    1,151                            1,151
                                     IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
   162   0607139A                   IMPROVED TURBINE ENGINE              51,164                           51,164
                                     PROGRAM.
   163   0607140A                   EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES FROM            2,481                            2,481
                                     NIE.
   164   0607141A                   LOGISTICS AUTOMATION.......           1,673                            1,673
   166   0607665A                   FAMILY OF BIOMETRICS.......          13,237                           13,237
   167   0607865A                   PATRIOT PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT         105,816                          105,816
   169   0202429A                   AEROSTAT JOINT PROJECT--             40,565                           40,565
                                     COCOM EXERCISE.
   171   0203728A                   JOINT AUTOMATED DEEP                 35,719                           35,719
                                     OPERATION COORDINATION
                                     SYSTEM (JADOCS).
   172   0203735A                   COMBAT VEHICLE IMPROVEMENT          257,167          35,000          292,167
                                     PROGRAMS.
         .........................      Stryker Lethality                               [35,000]
                                        Upgrades.
   173   0203740A                   MANEUVER CONTROL SYSTEM....          15,445                           15,445
   175   0203752A                   AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT               364                              364
                                     IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
   176   0203758A                   DIGITIZATION...............           4,361                            4,361
   177   0203801A                   MISSILE/AIR DEFENSE PRODUCT           3,154                            3,154
                                     IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
   178   0203802A                   OTHER MISSILE PRODUCT                35,951                           35,951
                                     IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS.
   179   0203808A                   TRACTOR CARD...............          34,686                           34,686
   180   0205402A                   INTEGRATED BASE DEFENSE--            10,750                           10,750
                                     OPERATIONAL SYSTEM DEV.
   181   0205410A                   MATERIALS HANDLING                      402                              402
                                     EQUIPMENT.
   183   0205456A                   LOWER TIER AIR AND MISSILE           64,159                           64,159
                                     DEFENSE (AMD) SYSTEM.
   184   0205778A                   GUIDED MULTIPLE-LAUNCH               17,527                           17,527
                                     ROCKET SYSTEM (GMLRS).
   185   0208053A                   JOINT TACTICAL GROUND                20,515                           20,515
                                     SYSTEM.
   187   0303028A                   SECURITY AND INTELLIGENCE            12,368                           12,368
                                     ACTIVITIES.
   188   0303140A                   INFORMATION SYSTEMS                  31,154                           31,154
                                     SECURITY PROGRAM.
   189   0303141A                   GLOBAL COMBAT SUPPORT                12,274                           12,274
                                     SYSTEM.
   190   0303142A                   SATCOM GROUND ENVIRONMENT             9,355                            9,355
                                     (SPACE).
   191   0303150A                   WWMCCS/GLOBAL COMMAND AND             7,053                            7,053
                                     CONTROL SYSTEM.
   193   0305179A                   INTEGRATED BROADCAST                    750                              750
                                     SERVICE (IBS).
   194   0305204A                   TACTICAL UNMANNED AERIAL             13,225                           13,225
                                     VEHICLES.
   195   0305206A                   AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE              22,870                           22,870
                                     SYSTEMS.
   196   0305208A                   DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/           25,592                           25,592
                                     SURFACE SYSTEMS.
   199   0305233A                   RQ-7 UAV...................           7,297                            7,297
   201   0310349A                   WIN-T INCREMENT 2--INITIAL            3,800                            3,800
                                     NETWORKING.
   202   0708045A                   END ITEM INDUSTRIAL                  48,442                           48,442
                                     PREPAREDNESS ACTIVITIES.
  202A   9999999999                 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS........           4,536                            4,536
         .........................     SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL           1,129,297          35,000        1,164,297
                                       SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         .........................
         .........................       TOTAL RESEARCH,              6,919,178         105,500        7,024,678
                                         DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                         EVAL, ARMY.
         .........................
         .........................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST
                                     & EVAL, NAVY
         .........................  BASIC RESEARCH
   001   0601103N                   UNIVERSITY RESEARCH                 116,196          18,000          134,196
                                     INITIATIVES.
         .........................      Defense University                              [18,000]
                                        Research Instumentation
                                        Program increase.
   002   0601152N                   IN-HOUSE LABORATORY                  19,126                           19,126
                                     INDEPENDENT RESEARCH.
   003   0601153N                   DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES..         451,606                          451,606
         .........................     SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH.         586,928          18,000          604,928
         .........................
         .........................  APPLIED RESEARCH
   004   0602114N                   POWER PROJECTION APPLIED             68,723                           68,723
                                     RESEARCH.
   005   0602123N                   FORCE PROTECTION APPLIED            154,963                          154,963
                                     RESEARCH.
   006   0602131M                   MARINE CORPS LANDING FORCE           49,001                           49,001
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   007   0602235N                   COMMON PICTURE APPLIED               42,551                           42,551
                                     RESEARCH.
   008   0602236N                   WARFIGHTER SUSTAINMENT               45,056                           45,056
                                     APPLIED RESEARCH.
   009   0602271N                   ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS             115,051                          115,051
                                     APPLIED RESEARCH.
   010   0602435N                   OCEAN WARFIGHTING                    42,252          20,000           62,252
                                     ENVIRONMENT APPLIED
                                     RESEARCH.
         .........................      Service Life Extension                          [20,000]
                                        for the AGOR Ship.
   011   0602651M                   JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS              6,119                            6,119
                                     APPLIED RESEARCH.
   012   0602747N                   UNDERSEA WARFARE APPLIED            123,750                          123,750
                                     RESEARCH.
   013   0602750N                   FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES           179,686                          179,686
                                     APPLIED RESEARCH.
   014   0602782N                   MINE AND EXPEDITIONARY               37,418                           37,418
                                     WARFARE APPLIED RESEARCH.
         .........................     SUBTOTAL APPLIED                 864,570          20,000          884,570
                                       RESEARCH.
         .........................
         .........................  ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                     DEVELOPMENT
   015   0603114N                   POWER PROJECTION ADVANCED            37,093                           37,093
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   016   0603123N                   FORCE PROTECTION ADVANCED            38,044                           38,044
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   017   0603271N                   ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS              34,899                           34,899
                                     ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
   018   0603640M                   USMC ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY            137,562                          137,562
                                     DEMONSTRATION (ATD).
   019   0603651M                   JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS             12,745                           12,745
                                     TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   020   0603673N                   FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES           258,860         -10,000          248,860
                                     ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
         .........................      Program decrease.......                        [-10,000]
   021   0603680N                   MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY             57,074                           57,074
                                     PROGRAM.
   022   0603729N                   WARFIGHTER PROTECTION                 4,807                            4,807
                                     ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
   023   0603747N                   UNDERSEA WARFARE ADVANCED            13,748                           13,748
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   024   0603758N                   NAVY WARFIGHTING                     66,041                           66,041
                                     EXPERIMENTS AND
                                     DEMONSTRATIONS.
   025   0603782N                   MINE AND EXPEDITIONARY                1,991                            1,991
                                     WARFARE ADVANCED
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
         .........................     SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                662,864         -10,000          652,864
                                       TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         .........................
         .........................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                     DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
   026   0603207N                   AIR/OCEAN TACTICAL                   41,832                           41,832
                                     APPLICATIONS.
   027   0603216N                   AVIATION SURVIVABILITY.....           5,404                            5,404
   028   0603237N                   DEPLOYABLE JOINT COMMAND              3,086                            3,086
                                     AND CONTROL.
   029   0603251N                   AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS...........          11,643                           11,643
   030   0603254N                   ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT....           5,555                            5,555
   031   0603261N                   TACTICAL AIRBORNE                     3,087                            3,087
                                     RECONNAISSANCE.
   032   0603382N                   ADVANCED COMBAT SYSTEMS               1,636                            1,636
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   033   0603502N                   SURFACE AND SHALLOW WATER           118,588                          118,588
                                     MINE COUNTERMEASURES.
   034   0603506N                   SURFACE SHIP TORPEDO                 77,385                           77,385
                                     DEFENSE.
   035   0603512N                   CARRIER SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT           8,348                            8,348
   036   0603525N                   PILOT FISH.................         123,246                          123,246
   037   0603527N                   RETRACT LARCH..............          28,819                           28,819
   038   0603536N                   RETRACT JUNIPER............         112,678                          112,678
   039   0603542N                   RADIOLOGICAL CONTROL.......             710                              710
   040   0603553N                   SURFACE ASW................           1,096                            1,096
   041   0603561N                   ADVANCED SUBMARINE SYSTEM            87,160          48,000          135,160
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
         .........................      Program increase.......                         [48,000]
   042   0603562N                   SUBMARINE TACTICAL WARFARE           10,371                           10,371
                                     SYSTEMS.
   043   0603563N                   SHIP CONCEPT ADVANCED                11,888                           11,888
                                     DESIGN.
   044   0603564N                   SHIP PRELIMINARY DESIGN &             4,332                            4,332
                                     FEASIBILITY STUDIES.
   045   0603570N                   ADVANCED NUCLEAR POWER              482,040        -419,300           62,740
                                     SYSTEMS.
         .........................      Transfer to National                          [-419,300]
                                        Sea-Based Deterrance
                                        Fund.
   046   0603573N                   ADVANCED SURFACE MACHINERY           25,904                           25,904
                                     SYSTEMS.
   047   0603576N                   CHALK EAGLE................         511,802                          511,802
   048   0603581N                   LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP (LCS).         118,416                          118,416
   049   0603582N                   COMBAT SYSTEM INTEGRATION..          35,901                           35,901
   050   0603595N                   OHIO REPLACEMENT...........         971,393        -971,393                0
         .........................      Transfer to National                          [-971,393]
                                        Sea-Based Deterrance
                                        Fund-OR Development.
   051   0603596N                   LCS MISSION MODULES........         206,149                          206,149
   052   0603597N                   AUTOMATED TEST AND RE-TEST            8,000                            8,000
                                     (ATRT).
   053   0603609N                   CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS.....           7,678                            7,678
   054   0603611M                   MARINE CORPS ASSAULT                219,082                          219,082
                                     VEHICLES.
   055   0603635M                   MARINE CORPS GROUND COMBAT/             623                              623
                                     SUPPORT SYSTEM.
   056   0603654N                   JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE              18,260                           18,260
                                     ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT.
   057   0603658N                   COOPERATIVE ENGAGEMENT.....          76,247                           76,247
   058   0603713N                   OCEAN ENGINEERING                     4,520                            4,520
                                     TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   059   0603721N                   ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION...          20,711                           20,711
   060   0603724N                   NAVY ENERGY PROGRAM........          47,761                           47,761
   061   0603725N                   FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT.....           5,226                            5,226
   062   0603734N                   CHALK CORAL................         182,771                          182,771
   063   0603739N                   NAVY LOGISTIC PRODUCTIVITY.           3,866                            3,866
   064   0603746N                   RETRACT MAPLE..............         360,065                          360,065
   065   0603748N                   LINK PLUMERIA..............         237,416                          237,416
   066   0603751N                   RETRACT ELM................          37,944                           37,944
   067   0603764N                   LINK EVERGREEN.............          47,312                           47,312
   068   0603787N                   SPECIAL PROCESSES..........          17,408                           17,408
   069   0603790N                   NATO RESEARCH AND                     9,359                            9,359
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   070   0603795N                   LAND ATTACK TECHNOLOGY.....             887          10,000           10,887
         .........................      5-Inch Guided                                   [10,000]
                                        Projectile Technology.
   071   0603851M                   JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS             29,448                           29,448
                                     TESTING.
   072   0603860N                   JOINT PRECISION APPROACH             91,479                           91,479
                                     AND LANDING SYSTEMS--DEM/
                                     VAL.
   073   0603925N                   DIRECTED ENERGY AND                  67,360                           67,360
                                     ELECTRIC WEAPON SYSTEMS.
   074   0604112N                   GERALD R. FORD CLASS                 48,105                           48,105
                                     NUCLEAR AIRCRAFT CARRIER
                                     (CVN 78--80).
   075   0604122N                   REMOTE MINEHUNTING SYSTEM            20,089                           20,089
                                     (RMS).
   076   0604272N                   TACTICAL AIR DIRECTIONAL             18,969                           18,969
                                     INFRARED COUNTERMEASURES
                                     (TADIRCM).
   077   0604279N                   ASE SELF-PROTECTION                   7,874                            7,874
                                     OPTIMIZATION.
   078   0604292N                   MH-XX......................           5,298                            5,298
   079   0604454N                   LX (R).....................          46,486          29,000           75,486
         .........................      LX(R) Acceleration.....                         [29,000]
   080   0604653N                   JOINT COUNTER RADIO                   3,817                            3,817
                                     CONTROLLED IED ELECTRONIC
                                     WARFARE (JCREW).
   081   0604659N                   PRECISION STRIKE WEAPONS              9,595                            9,595
                                     DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
   082   0604707N                   SPACE AND ELECTRONIC                 29,581                           29,581
                                     WARFARE (SEW) ARCHITECTURE/
                                     ENGINEERING SUPPORT.
   083   0604786N                   OFFENSIVE ANTI-SURFACE              285,849                          285,849
                                     WARFARE WEAPON DEVELOPMENT.
   084   0605812M                   JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL                 36,656                           36,656
                                     VEHICLE (JLTV) ENGINEERING
                                     AND MANUFACTURING
                                     DEVELOPMENT PH.
   085   0303354N                   ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT--             9,835                            9,835
                                     MIP.
   086   0304270N                   ELECTRONIC WARFARE                      580                              580
                                     DEVELOPMENT--MIP.
         .........................     SUBTOTAL ADVANCED              5,024,626      -1,303,693        3,720,933
                                       COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
                                       PROTOTYPES.
         .........................
         .........................  SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
                                     DEMONSTRATION
   087   0603208N                   TRAINING SYSTEM AIRCRAFT...          21,708                           21,708
   088   0604212N                   OTHER HELO DEVELOPMENT.....          11,101                           11,101
   089   0604214N                   AV-8B AIRCRAFT--ENG DEV....          39,878                           39,878
   090   0604215N                   STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT......          53,059                           53,059
   091   0604216N                   MULTI-MISSION HELICOPTER             21,358                           21,358
                                     UPGRADE DEVELOPMENT.
   092   0604218N                   AIR/OCEAN EQUIPMENT                   4,515                            4,515
                                     ENGINEERING.
   093   0604221N                   P-3 MODERNIZATION PROGRAM..           1,514                            1,514
   094   0604230N                   WARFARE SUPPORT SYSTEM.....           5,875                            5,875
   095   0604231N                   TACTICAL COMMAND SYSTEM....          81,553                           81,553
   096   0604234N                   ADVANCED HAWKEYE...........         272,149                          272,149
   097   0604245N                   H-1 UPGRADES...............          27,235          25,000           52,235
         .........................      UH-1Y/AH-1Z Readiness                           [25,000]
                                        Improvement Unfunded
                                        Requirement.
   098   0604261N                   ACOUSTIC SEARCH SENSORS....          35,763                           35,763
   099   0604262N                   V-22A......................          87,918                           87,918
   100   0604264N                   AIR CREW SYSTEMS                     12,679                           12,679
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   101   0604269N                   EA-18......................          56,921                           56,921
   102   0604270N                   ELECTRONIC WARFARE                   23,685                           23,685
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   103   0604273N                   EXECUTIVE HELO DEVELOPMENT.         507,093                          507,093
   104   0604274N                   NEXT GENERATION JAMMER              411,767                          411,767
                                     (NGJ).
   105   0604280N                   JOINT TACTICAL RADIO                 25,071                           25,071
                                     SYSTEM--NAVY (JTRS-NAVY).
   106   0604307N                   SURFACE COMBATANT COMBAT            443,433                          443,433
                                     SYSTEM ENGINEERING.
   107   0604311N                   LPD-17 CLASS SYSTEMS                    747                              747
                                     INTEGRATION.
   108   0604329N                   SMALL DIAMETER BOMB (SDB)..          97,002                           97,002
   109   0604366N                   STANDARD MISSILE                    129,649                          129,649
                                     IMPROVEMENTS.
   110   0604373N                   AIRBORNE MCM...............          11,647                           11,647
   111   0604376M                   MARINE AIR GROUND TASK                2,778                            2,778
                                     FORCE (MAGTF) ELECTRONIC
                                     WARFARE (EW) FOR AVIATION.
   112   0604378N                   NAVAL INTEGRATED FIRE                23,695                           23,695
                                     CONTROL--COUNTER AIR
                                     SYSTEMS ENGINEERING.
   113   0604404N                   UNMANNED CARRIER LAUNCHED           134,708                          134,708
                                     AIRBORNE SURVEILLANCE AND
                                     STRIKE (UCLASS) SYSTEM.
   114   0604501N                   ADVANCED ABOVE WATER                 43,914                           43,914
                                     SENSORS.
   115   0604503N                   SSN-688 AND TRIDENT                 109,908                          109,908
                                     MODERNIZATION.
   116   0604504N                   AIR CONTROL................          57,928                           57,928
   117   0604512N                   SHIPBOARD AVIATION SYSTEMS.         120,217          15,000          135,217
         .........................      Concept development....                         [15,000]
   118   0604522N                   AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE             241,754                          241,754
                                     RADAR (AMDR) SYSTEM.
   119   0604558N                   NEW DESIGN SSN.............         122,556                          122,556
   120   0604562N                   SUBMARINE TACTICAL WARFARE           48,213          12,000           60,213
                                     SYSTEM.
         .........................      Program increase.......                         [12,000]
   121   0604567N                   SHIP CONTRACT DESIGN/ LIVE           49,712                           49,712
                                     FIRE T&E.
   122   0604574N                   NAVY TACTICAL COMPUTER                4,096                            4,096
                                     RESOURCES.
   123   0604580N                   VIRGINIA PAYLOAD MODULE             167,719                          167,719
                                     (VPM).
   124   0604601N                   MINE DEVELOPMENT...........          15,122                           15,122
   125   0604610N                   LIGHTWEIGHT TORPEDO                  33,738                           33,738
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   126   0604654N                   JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE               8,123                            8,123
                                     ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT.
   127   0604703N                   PERSONNEL, TRAINING,                  7,686                            7,686
                                     SIMULATION, AND HUMAN
                                     FACTORS.
   128   0604727N                   JOINT STANDOFF WEAPON                   405                              405
                                     SYSTEMS.
   129   0604755N                   SHIP SELF DEFENSE (DETECT &         153,836                          153,836
                                     CONTROL).
   130   0604756N                   SHIP SELF DEFENSE (ENGAGE:           99,619                           99,619
                                     HARD KILL).
   131   0604757N                   SHIP SELF DEFENSE (ENGAGE:          116,798                          116,798
                                     SOFT KILL/EW).
   132   0604761N                   INTELLIGENCE ENGINEERING...           4,353                            4,353
   133   0604771N                   MEDICAL DEVELOPMENT........           9,443                            9,443
   134   0604777N                   NAVIGATION/ID SYSTEM.......          32,469                           32,469
   135   0604800M                   JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER (JSF)--        537,901                          537,901
                                     EMD.
   136   0604800N                   JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER (JSF)--        504,736                          504,736
                                     EMD.
   137   0604810M                   JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER FOLLOW          59,265         -12,500           46,765
                                     ON DEVELOPMENT--MARINE
                                     CORPS.
         .........................      Program delay..........                        [-12,500]
   138   0604810N                   JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER FOLLOW          47,579         -12,500           35,079
                                     ON DEVELOPMENT--NAVY.
         .........................      Program delay..........                        [-12,500]
   139   0605013M                   INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY                5,914                            5,914
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   140   0605013N                   INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY               89,711                           89,711
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   141   0605212N                   CH-53K RDTE................         632,092                          632,092
   142   0605220N                   SHIP TO SHORE CONNECTOR               7,778                            7,778
                                     (SSC).
   143   0605450N                   JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND MISSILE          25,898                           25,898
                                     (JAGM).
   144   0605500N                   MULTI-MISSION MARITIME              247,929                          247,929
                                     AIRCRAFT (MMA).
   145   0204202N                   DDG-1000...................         103,199                          103,199
   146   0304231N                   TACTICAL COMMAND SYSTEM--               998                              998
                                     MIP.
   147   0304785N                   TACTICAL CRYPTOLOGIC                 17,785                           17,785
                                     SYSTEMS.
   148   0305124N                   SPECIAL APPLICATIONS                 35,905                           35,905
                                     PROGRAM.
         .........................     SUBTOTAL SYSTEM                6,308,800          27,000        6,335,800
                                       DEVELOPMENT &
                                       DEMONSTRATION.
         .........................
         .........................  MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
   149   0604256N                   THREAT SIMULATOR                     30,769                           30,769
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   150   0604258N                   TARGET SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.         112,606                          112,606
   151   0604759N                   MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT.......          61,234                           61,234
   152   0605126N                   JOINT THEATER AIR AND                 6,995                            6,995
                                     MISSILE DEFENSE
                                     ORGANIZATION.
   153   0605152N                   STUDIES AND ANALYSIS                  4,011                            4,011
                                     SUPPORT--NAVY.
   154   0605154N                   CENTER FOR NAVAL ANALYSES..          48,563                           48,563
   155   0605285N                   NEXT GENERATION FIGHTER....           5,000                            5,000
   157   0605804N                   TECHNICAL INFORMATION                   925                              925
                                     SERVICES.
   158   0605853N                   MANAGEMENT, TECHNICAL &              78,143                           78,143
                                     INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT.
   159   0605856N                   STRATEGIC TECHNICAL SUPPORT           3,258                            3,258
   160   0605861N                   RDT&E SCIENCE AND                    76,948                           76,948
                                     TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT.
   161   0605863N                   RDT&E SHIP AND AIRCRAFT             132,122                          132,122
                                     SUPPORT.
   162   0605864N                   TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT         351,912                          351,912
   163   0605865N                   OPERATIONAL TEST AND                 17,985                           17,985
                                     EVALUATION CAPABILITY.
   164   0605866N                   NAVY SPACE AND ELECTRONIC             5,316                            5,316
                                     WARFARE (SEW) SUPPORT.
   165   0605867N                   SEW SURVEILLANCE/                     6,519                            6,519
                                     RECONNAISSANCE SUPPORT.
   166   0605873M                   MARINE CORPS PROGRAM WIDE            13,649                           13,649
                                     SUPPORT.
         .........................     SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT              955,955                          955,955
                                       SUPPORT.
         .........................
         .........................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
                                     DEVELOPMENT
   174   0101221N                   STRATEGIC SUB & WEAPONS             107,039                          107,039
                                     SYSTEM SUPPORT.
   175   0101224N                   SSBN SECURITY TECHNOLOGY             46,506                           46,506
                                     PROGRAM.
   176   0101226N                   SUBMARINE ACOUSTIC WARFARE            3,900                            3,900
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   177   0101402N                   NAVY STRATEGIC                       16,569                           16,569
                                     COMMUNICATIONS.
   178   0203761N                   RAPID TECHNOLOGY TRANSITION          18,632                           18,632
                                     (RTT).
   179   0204136N                   F/A-18 SQUADRONS...........         133,265                          133,265
   181   0204163N                   FLEET TELECOMMUNICATIONS             62,867                           62,867
                                     (TACTICAL).
   182   0204228N                   SURFACE SUPPORT............          36,045                           36,045
   183   0204229N                   TOMAHAWK AND TOMAHAWK                25,228                           25,228
                                     MISSION PLANNING CENTER
                                     (TMPC).
   184   0204311N                   INTEGRATED SURVEILLANCE              54,218                           54,218
                                     SYSTEM.
   185   0204413N                   AMPHIBIOUS TACTICAL SUPPORT          11,335                           11,335
                                     UNITS (DISPLACEMENT CRAFT).
   186   0204460M                   GROUND/AIR TASK ORIENTED             80,129                           80,129
                                     RADAR (G/ATOR).
   187   0204571N                   CONSOLIDATED TRAINING                39,087          15,000           54,087
                                     SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         .........................      Anti-Submarine Warfare                          [15,000]
                                        Underwater Range
                                        Instrumentation Upgrade.
   188   0204574N                   CRYPTOLOGIC DIRECT SUPPORT.           1,915                            1,915
   189   0204575N                   ELECTRONIC WARFARE (EW)              46,609                           46,609
                                     READINESS SUPPORT.
   190   0205601N                   HARM IMPROVEMENT...........          52,708                           52,708
   191   0205604N                   TACTICAL DATA LINKS........         149,997                          149,997
   192   0205620N                   SURFACE ASW COMBAT SYSTEM            24,460                           24,460
                                     INTEGRATION.
   193   0205632N                   MK-48 ADCAP................          42,206                           42,206
   194   0205633N                   AVIATION IMPROVEMENTS......         117,759                          117,759
   195   0205675N                   OPERATIONAL NUCLEAR POWER           101,323                          101,323
                                     SYSTEMS.
   196   0206313M                   MARINE CORPS COMMUNICATIONS          67,763                           67,763
                                     SYSTEMS.
   197   0206335M                   COMMON AVIATION COMMAND AND          13,431                           13,431
                                     CONTROL SYSTEM (CAC2S).
   198   0206623M                   MARINE CORPS GROUND COMBAT/          56,769                           56,769
                                     SUPPORTING ARMS SYSTEMS.
   199   0206624M                   MARINE CORPS COMBAT                  20,729                           20,729
                                     SERVICES SUPPORT.
   200   0206625M                   USMC INTELLIGENCE/                   13,152                           13,152
                                     ELECTRONIC WARFARE SYSTEMS
                                     (MIP).
   201   0206629M                   AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT VEHICLE.          48,535                           48,535
   202   0207161N                   TACTICAL AIM MISSILES......          76,016                           76,016
   203   0207163N                   ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR-           32,172                           32,172
                                     TO-AIR MISSILE (AMRAAM).
   208   0303109N                   SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS             53,239                           53,239
                                     (SPACE).
   209   0303138N                   CONSOLIDATED AFLOAT NETWORK          21,677                           21,677
                                     ENTERPRISE SERVICES
                                     (CANES).
   210   0303140N                   INFORMATION SYSTEMS                  28,102                           28,102
                                     SECURITY PROGRAM.
   211   0303150M                   WWMCCS/GLOBAL COMMAND AND               294                              294
                                     CONTROL SYSTEM.
   213   0305160N                   NAVY METEOROLOGICAL AND                 599                              599
                                     OCEAN SENSORS-SPACE
                                     (METOC).
   214   0305192N                   MILITARY INTELLIGENCE                 6,207                            6,207
                                     PROGRAM (MIP) ACTIVITIES.
   215   0305204N                   TACTICAL UNMANNED AERIAL              8,550                            8,550
                                     VEHICLES.
   216   0305205N                   UAS INTEGRATION AND                  41,831                           41,831
                                     INTEROPERABILITY.
   217   0305208M                   DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/            1,105                            1,105
                                     SURFACE SYSTEMS.
   218   0305208N                   DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/           33,149                           33,149
                                     SURFACE SYSTEMS.
   219   0305220N                   RQ-4 UAV...................         227,188                          227,188
   220   0305231N                   MQ-8 UAV...................          52,770                           52,770
   221   0305232M                   RQ-11 UAV..................             635                              635
   222   0305233N                   RQ-7 UAV...................             688                              688
   223   0305234N                   SMALL (LEVEL 0) TACTICAL              4,647                            4,647
                                     UAS (STUASL0).
   224   0305239M                   RQ-21A.....................           6,435                            6,435
   225   0305241N                   MULTI-INTELLIGENCE SENSOR            49,145                           49,145
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   226   0305242M                   UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS               9,246                            9,246
                                     (UAS) PAYLOADS (MIP).
   227   0305421N                   RQ-4 MODERNIZATION.........         150,854                          150,854
   228   0308601N                   MODELING AND SIMULATION               4,757                            4,757
                                     SUPPORT.
   229   0702207N                   DEPOT MAINTENANCE (NON-IF).          24,185                           24,185
   231   0708730N                   MARITIME TECHNOLOGY                   4,321                            4,321
                                     (MARITECH).
  231A   9999999999                 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS........       1,252,185                        1,252,185
         .........................     SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL           3,482,173          15,000        3,497,173
                                       SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         .........................
         .........................       TOTAL RESEARCH,             17,885,916      -1,233,693       16,652,223
                                         DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                         EVAL, NAVY.
         .........................
         .........................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST
                                     & EVAL, AF
         .........................  BASIC RESEARCH
   001   0601102F                   DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES..         329,721                          329,721
   002   0601103F                   UNIVERSITY RESEARCH                 141,754                          141,754
                                     INITIATIVES.
   003   0601108F                   HIGH ENERGY LASER RESEARCH           13,778                           13,778
                                     INITIATIVES.
         .........................     SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH.         485,253                          485,253
         .........................
         .........................  APPLIED RESEARCH
   004   0602102F                   MATERIALS..................         125,234                          125,234
   005   0602201F                   AEROSPACE VEHICLE                   123,438                          123,438
                                     TECHNOLOGIES.
   006   0602202F                   HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS APPLIED         100,530         -10,000           90,530
                                     RESEARCH.
         .........................      Program decrease.......                        [-10,000]
   007   0602203F                   AEROSPACE PROPULSION.......         182,326          -5,000          177,326
         .........................      Program decrease.......                         [-5,000]
   008   0602204F                   AEROSPACE SENSORS..........         147,291                          147,291
   009   0602601F                   SPACE TECHNOLOGY...........         116,122                          116,122
   010   0602602F                   CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS.....          99,851                           99,851
   011   0602605F                   DIRECTED ENERGY TECHNOLOGY.         115,604                          115,604
   012   0602788F                   DOMINANT INFORMATION                164,909                          164,909
                                     SCIENCES AND METHODS.
   013   0602890F                   HIGH ENERGY LASER RESEARCH.          42,037                           42,037
         .........................     SUBTOTAL APPLIED               1,217,342         -15,000        1,202,342
                                       RESEARCH.
         .........................
         .........................  ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                     DEVELOPMENT
   014   0603112F                   ADVANCED MATERIALS FOR               37,665          10,000           47,665
                                     WEAPON SYSTEMS.
         .........................      Metals Affordability                            [10,000]
                                        Initiative.
   015   0603199F                   SUSTAINMENT SCIENCE AND              18,378                           18,378
                                     TECHNOLOGY (S&T).
   016   0603203F                   ADVANCED AEROSPACE SENSORS.          42,183                           42,183
   017   0603211F                   AEROSPACE TECHNOLOGY DEV/           100,733                          100,733
                                     DEMO.
   018   0603216F                   AEROSPACE PROPULSION AND            168,821                          168,821
                                     POWER TECHNOLOGY.
   019   0603270F                   ELECTRONIC COMBAT                    47,032                           47,032
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   020   0603401F                   ADVANCED SPACECRAFT                  54,897                           54,897
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   021   0603444F                   MAUI SPACE SURVEILLANCE              12,853                           12,853
                                     SYSTEM (MSSS).
   022   0603456F                   HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS                  25,448                           25,448
                                     ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   023   0603601F                   CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS                 48,536                           48,536
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   024   0603605F                   ADVANCED WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY          30,195                           30,195
   025   0603680F                   MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY             42,630          10,000           52,630
                                     PROGRAM.
         .........................      Maturation of advanced                          [10,000]
                                        manufacturing for low-
                                        cost sustainment.
   026   0603788F                   BATTLESPACE KNOWLEDGE                46,414                           46,414
                                     DEVELOPMENT AND
                                     DEMONSTRATION.
         .........................     SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                675,785          20,000          695,785
                                       TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         .........................
         .........................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                     DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
   027   0603260F                   INTELLIGENCE ADVANCED                 5,032                            5,032
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   029   0603438F                   SPACE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY...           4,070                            4,070
   030   0603742F                   COMBAT IDENTIFICATION                21,790                           21,790
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   031   0603790F                   NATO RESEARCH AND                     4,736                            4,736
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   033   0603830F                   SPACE SECURITY AND DEFENSE           30,771                           30,771
                                     PROGRAM.
   034   0603851F                   INTERCONTINENTAL BALLISTIC           39,765                           39,765
                                     MISSILE--DEM/VAL.
   036   0604015F                   LONG RANGE STRIKE..........       1,246,228        -460,000          786,228
         .........................      Program decrease.......                       [-460,000]
   037   0604317F                   TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER........           3,512          10,000           13,512
         .........................      Technology transfer                             [10,000]
                                        program increase.
   038   0604327F                   HARD AND DEEPLY BURIED               54,637                           54,637
                                     TARGET DEFEAT SYSTEM
                                     (HDBTDS) PROGRAM.
   040   0604422F                   WEATHER SYSTEM FOLLOW-ON...          76,108         -20,000           56,108
         .........................      Unjustified increase                           [-20,000]
                                        and analysis of
                                        alternatives.
   044   0604857F                   OPERATIONALLY RESPONSIVE              6,457          14,000           20,457
                                     SPACE.
         .........................      SSA, Weather, or Launch                         [14,000]
                                        Activities.
   045   0604858F                   TECH TRANSITION PROGRAM....         246,514                          246,514
   046   0605230F                   GROUND BASED STRATEGIC               75,166                           75,166
                                     DETERRENT.
   049   0207110F                   NEXT GENERATION AIR                   8,830          -4,900            3,930
                                     DOMINANCE.
         .........................      Program reduction......                         [-4,900]
   050   0207455F                   THREE DIMENSIONAL LONG-              14,939                           14,939
                                     RANGE RADAR (3DELRR).
   051   0305164F                   NAVSTAR GLOBAL POSITIONING          142,288                          142,288
                                     SYSTEM (USER EQUIPMENT)
                                     (SPACE).
   052   0306250F                   CYBER OPERATIONS TECHNOLOGY          81,732                           81,732
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
         .........................     SUBTOTAL ADVANCED              2,062,575        -460,900        1,601,675
                                       COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
                                       PROTOTYPES.
         .........................
         .........................  SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
                                     DEMONSTRATION
   055   0604270F                   ELECTRONIC WARFARE                      929                              929
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   056   0604281F                   TACTICAL DATA NETWORKS               60,256                           60,256
                                     ENTERPRISE.
   057   0604287F                   PHYSICAL SECURITY EQUIPMENT           5,973                            5,973
   058   0604329F                   SMALL DIAMETER BOMB (SDB)--          32,624                           32,624
                                     EMD.
   059   0604421F                   COUNTERSPACE SYSTEMS.......          24,208                           24,208
   060   0604425F                   SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS            32,374                           32,374
                                     SYSTEMS.
   061   0604426F                   SPACE FENCE................         243,909                          243,909
   062   0604429F                   AIRBORNE ELECTRONIC ATTACK.           8,358                            8,358
   063   0604441F                   SPACE BASED INFRARED SYSTEM         292,235          10,000          302,235
                                     (SBIRS) HIGH EMD.
         .........................      Exploitation of SBIRS..                         [10,000]
   064   0604602F                   ARMAMENT/ORDNANCE                    40,154                           40,154
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   065   0604604F                   SUBMUNITIONS...............           2,506                            2,506
   066   0604617F                   AGILE COMBAT SUPPORT.......          57,678                           57,678
   067   0604706F                   LIFE SUPPORT SYSTEMS.......           8,187                            8,187
   068   0604735F                   COMBAT TRAINING RANGES.....          15,795                           15,795
   069   0604800F                   F-35--EMD..................         589,441                          589,441
   071   0604853F                   EVOLVED EXPENDABLE LAUNCH            84,438         100,000          184,438
                                     VEHICLE PROGRAM (SPACE)--
                                     EMD.
         .........................      EELV Program--Launch                           [-84,438]
                                        Vehicle Development.
         .........................      EELV Program--Rocket                           [184,438]
                                        Propulsion System
                                        Development.
   072   0604932F                   LONG RANGE STANDOFF WEAPON.          36,643                           36,643
   073   0604933F                   ICBM FUZE MODERNIZATION....         142,551                          142,551
   074   0605213F                   F-22 MODERNIZATION                  140,640                          140,640
                                     INCREMENT 3.2B.
   075   0605214F                   GROUND ATTACK WEAPONS FUZE            3,598                            3,598
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   076   0605221F                   KC-46......................         602,364        -200,000          402,364
         .........................      Program decrease.......                       [-200,000]
   077   0605223F                   ADVANCED PILOT TRAINING....          11,395                           11,395
   078   0605229F                   CSAR HH-60 RECAPITALIZATION         156,085                          156,085
   080   0605431F                   ADVANCED EHF MILSATCOM              228,230                          228,230
                                     (SPACE).
   081   0605432F                   POLAR MILSATCOM (SPACE)....          72,084                           72,084
   082   0605433F                   WIDEBAND GLOBAL SATCOM               56,343          -4,000           52,343
                                     (SPACE).
         .........................      Excess to need.........                         [-4,000]
   083   0605458F                   AIR & SPACE OPS CENTER 10.2          47,629                           47,629
                                     RDT&E.
   084   0605931F                   B-2 DEFENSIVE MANAGEMENT            271,961                          271,961
                                     SYSTEM.
   085   0101125F                   NUCLEAR WEAPONS                     212,121                          212,121
                                     MODERNIZATION.
   086   0207171F                   F-15 EPAWSS................         186,481                          186,481
   087   0207701F                   FULL COMBAT MISSION                  18,082                           18,082
                                     TRAINING.
   088   0305176F                   COMBAT SURVIVOR EVADER                  993                              993
                                     LOCATOR.
   089   0307581F                   NEXTGEN JSTARS.............          44,343                           44,343
   091   0401319F                   PRESIDENTIAL AIRCRAFT               102,620                          102,620
                                     REPLACEMENT (PAR).
   092   0701212F                   AUTOMATED TEST SYSTEMS.....          14,563                           14,563
         .........................     SUBTOTAL SYSTEM                3,847,791         -94,000        3,753,791
                                       DEVELOPMENT &
                                       DEMONSTRATION.
         .........................
         .........................  MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
   093   0604256F                   THREAT SIMULATOR                     23,844                           23,844
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   094   0604759F                   MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT.......          68,302           5,000           73,302
         .........................      Airborne Sensor Data                             [5,000]
                                        Correlation Project.
   095   0605101F                   RAND PROJECT AIR FORCE.....          34,918                           34,918
   097   0605712F                   INITIAL OPERATIONAL TEST &           10,476                           10,476
                                     EVALUATION.
   098   0605807F                   TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT         673,908                          673,908
   099   0605860F                   ROCKET SYSTEMS LAUNCH                21,858                           21,858
                                     PROGRAM (SPACE).
   100   0605864F                   SPACE TEST PROGRAM (STP)...          28,228                           28,228
   101   0605976F                   FACILITIES RESTORATION AND           40,518                           40,518
                                     MODERNIZATION--TEST AND
                                     EVALUATION SUPPORT.
   102   0605978F                   FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT--             27,895                           27,895
                                     TEST AND EVALUATION
                                     SUPPORT.
   103   0606017F                   REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS AND            16,507                           16,507
                                     MATURATION.
   104   0606116F                   SPACE TEST AND TRAINING              18,997                           18,997
                                     RANGE DEVELOPMENT.
   106   0606392F                   SPACE AND MISSILE CENTER            185,305                          185,305
                                     (SMC) CIVILIAN WORKFORCE.
   107   0308602F                   ENTEPRISE INFORMATION                 4,841                            4,841
                                     SERVICES (EIS).
   108   0702806F                   ACQUISITION AND MANAGEMENT           15,357                           15,357
                                     SUPPORT.
   109   0804731F                   GENERAL SKILL TRAINING.....           1,315                            1,315
   111   1001004F                   INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES...           2,315                            2,315
         .........................     SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT            1,174,584           5,000        1,179,584
                                       SUPPORT.
         .........................
         .........................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
                                     DEVELOPMENT
   112   0603423F                   GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM           350,232                          350,232
                                     III--OPERATIONAL CONTROL
                                     SEGMENT.
   113   0604233F                   SPECIALIZED UNDERGRADUATE            10,465                           10,465
                                     FLIGHT TRAINING.
   114   0604445F                   WIDE AREA SURVEILLANCE.....          24,577                           24,577
   117   0605018F                   AF INTEGRATED PERSONNEL AND          69,694                           69,694
                                     PAY SYSTEM (AF-IPPS).
   118   0605024F                   ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY               26,718                           26,718
                                     EXECUTIVE AGENCY.
   119   0605278F                   HC/MC-130 RECAP RDT&E......          10,807                           10,807
   121   0101113F                   B-52 SQUADRONS.............          74,520                           74,520
   122   0101122F                   AIR-LAUNCHED CRUISE MISSILE             451                              451
                                     (ALCM).
   123   0101126F                   B-1B SQUADRONS.............           2,245                            2,245
   124   0101127F                   B-2 SQUADRONS..............         108,183                          108,183
   125   0101213F                   MINUTEMAN SQUADRONS........         178,929                          178,929
   126   0101313F                   STRAT WAR PLANNING SYSTEM--          28,481                           28,481
                                     USSTRATCOM.
   127   0101314F                   NIGHT FIST--USSTRATCOM.....              87                               87
   128   0101316F                   WORLDWIDE JOINT STRATEGIC             5,315                            5,315
                                     COMMUNICATIONS.
   131   0105921F                   SERVICE SUPPORT TO                    8,090                            8,090
                                     STRATCOM--SPACE ACTIVITIES.
   132   0205219F                   MQ-9 UAV...................         123,439                          123,439
   134   0207131F                   A-10 SQUADRONS.............                          16,200           16,200
         .........................      A-10 restoration:                               [16,200]
                                        operational flight
                                        program development.
   135   0207133F                   F-16 SQUADRONS.............         148,297          40,000          188,297
         .........................      AESA Radar Integration.                         [50,000]
         .........................      Unobligated balances...                        [-10,000]
   136   0207134F                   F-15E SQUADRONS............         179,283         -10,000          169,283
         .........................      Duplicative effort with                        [-10,000]
                                        the Navy.
   137   0207136F                   MANNED DESTRUCTIVE                   14,860                           14,860
                                     SUPPRESSION.
   138   0207138F                   F-22A SQUADRONS............         262,552                          262,552
   139   0207142F                   F-35 SQUADRONS.............         115,395         -25,000           90,395
         .........................      Program delay..........                        [-25,000]
   140   0207161F                   TACTICAL AIM MISSILES......          43,360                           43,360
   141   0207163F                   ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR-           46,160                           46,160
                                     TO-AIR MISSILE (AMRAAM).
   143   0207224F                   COMBAT RESCUE AND RECOVERY.             412                              412
   144   0207227F                   COMBAT RESCUE--PARARESCUE..             657                              657
   145   0207247F                   AF TENCAP..................          31,428                           31,428
   146   0207249F                   PRECISION ATTACK SYSTEMS              1,105                            1,105
                                     PROCUREMENT.
   147   0207253F                   COMPASS CALL...............          14,249                           14,249
   148   0207268F                   AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT           103,942                          103,942
                                     IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
   149   0207325F                   JOINT AIR-TO-SURFACE                 12,793                           12,793
                                     STANDOFF MISSILE (JASSM).
   150   0207410F                   AIR & SPACE OPERATIONS               21,193                           21,193
                                     CENTER (AOC).
   151   0207412F                   CONTROL AND REPORTING                   559                              559
                                     CENTER (CRC).
   152   0207417F                   AIRBORNE WARNING AND                161,812                          161,812
                                     CONTROL SYSTEM (AWACS).
   153   0207418F                   TACTICAL AIRBORNE CONTROL             6,001                            6,001
                                     SYSTEMS.
   155   0207431F                   COMBAT AIR INTELLIGENCE               7,793                            7,793
                                     SYSTEM ACTIVITIES.
   156   0207444F                   TACTICAL AIR CONTROL PARTY-          12,465                           12,465
                                     MOD.
   157   0207448F                   C2ISR TACTICAL DATA LINK...           1,681                            1,681
   159   0207452F                   DCAPES.....................          16,796                           16,796
   161   0207590F                   SEEK EAGLE.................          21,564                           21,564
   162   0207601F                   USAF MODELING AND                    24,994                           24,994
                                     SIMULATION.
   163   0207605F                   WARGAMING AND SIMULATION              6,035                            6,035
                                     CENTERS.
   164   0207697F                   DISTRIBUTED TRAINING AND              4,358                            4,358
                                     EXERCISES.
   165   0208006F                   MISSION PLANNING SYSTEMS...          55,835                           55,835
   167   0208087F                   AF OFFENSIVE CYBERSPACE              12,874                           12,874
                                     OPERATIONS.
   168   0208088F                   AF DEFENSIVE CYBERSPACE               7,681                            7,681
                                     OPERATIONS.
   171   0301017F                   GLOBAL SENSOR INTEGRATED ON           5,974                            5,974
                                     NETWORK (GSIN).
   177   0301400F                   SPACE SUPERIORITY                    13,815                           13,815
                                     INTELLIGENCE.
   178   0302015F                   E-4B NATIONAL AIRBORNE               80,360                           80,360
                                     OPERATIONS CENTER (NAOC).
   179   0303001F                   FAMILY OF ADVANCED BLOS               3,907                            3,907
                                     TERMINALS (FAB-T).
   180   0303131F                   MINIMUM ESSENTIAL EMERGENCY          75,062                           75,062
                                     COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK
                                     (MEECN).
   181   0303140F                   INFORMATION SYSTEMS                  46,599                           46,599
                                     SECURITY PROGRAM.
   183   0303142F                   GLOBAL FORCE MANAGEMENT--             2,470                            2,470
                                     DATA INITIATIVE.
   186   0304260F                   AIRBORNE SIGINT ENTERPRISE.         112,775                          112,775
   189   0305099F                   GLOBAL AIR TRAFFIC                    4,235                            4,235
                                     MANAGEMENT (GATM).
   192   0305110F                   SATELLITE CONTROL NETWORK             7,879          -2,000            5,879
                                     (SPACE).
         .........................      Unjustified increase in                         [-2,000]
                                        systems engineering.
   193   0305111F                   WEATHER SERVICE............          29,955                           29,955
   194   0305114F                   AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL,                 21,485                           21,485
                                     APPROACH, AND LANDING
                                     SYSTEM (ATCALS).
   195   0305116F                   AERIAL TARGETS.............           2,515                            2,515
   198   0305128F                   SECURITY AND INVESTIGATIVE              472                              472
                                     ACTIVITIES.
   199   0305145F                   ARMS CONTROL IMPLEMENTATION          12,137                           12,137
   200   0305146F                   DEFENSE JOINT                           361                              361
                                     COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
                                     ACTIVITIES.
   203   0305173F                   SPACE AND MISSILE TEST AND            3,162                            3,162
                                     EVALUATION CENTER.
   204   0305174F                   SPACE INNOVATION,                     1,543                            1,543
                                     INTEGRATION AND RAPID
                                     TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   205   0305179F                   INTEGRATED BROADCAST                  7,860                            7,860
                                     SERVICE (IBS).
   206   0305182F                   SPACELIFT RANGE SYSTEM                6,902                            6,902
                                     (SPACE).
   207   0305202F                   DRAGON U-2.................          34,471                           34,471
   209   0305206F                   AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE              50,154          10,000           60,154
                                     SYSTEMS.
         .........................      Wide Area Surveillance                          [10,000]
                                        Capability.
   210   0305207F                   MANNED RECONNAISSANCE                13,245                           13,245
                                     SYSTEMS.
   211   0305208F                   DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/           22,784                           22,784
                                     SURFACE SYSTEMS.
   212   0305219F                   MQ-1 PREDATOR A UAV........             716                              716
   213   0305220F                   RQ-4 UAV...................         208,053                          208,053
   214   0305221F                   NETWORK-CENTRIC                      21,587                           21,587
                                     COLLABORATIVE TARGETING.
   215   0305236F                   COMMON DATA LINK EXECUTIVE           43,986                           43,986
                                     AGENT (CDL EA).
   216   0305238F                   NATO AGS...................         197,486                          197,486
   217   0305240F                   SUPPORT TO DCGS ENTERPRISE.          28,434                           28,434
   218   0305265F                   GPS III SPACE SEGMENT......         180,902                          180,902
   220   0305614F                   JSPOC MISSION SYSTEM.......          81,911                           81,911
   221   0305881F                   RAPID CYBER ACQUISITION....           3,149                            3,149
   222   0305913F                   NUDET DETECTION SYSTEM               14,447                           14,447
                                     (SPACE).
   223   0305940F                   SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS            20,077                           20,077
                                     OPERATIONS.
   225   0308699F                   SHARED EARLY WARNING (SEW).             853                              853
   226   0401115F                   C-130 AIRLIFT SQUADRON.....          33,962                           33,962
   227   0401119F                   C-5 AIRLIFT SQUADRONS (IF).          42,864                           42,864
   228   0401130F                   C-17 AIRCRAFT (IF).........          54,807                           54,807
   229   0401132F                   C-130J PROGRAM.............          31,010                           31,010
   230   0401134F                   LARGE AIRCRAFT IR                     6,802                            6,802
                                     COUNTERMEASURES (LAIRCM).
   231   0401219F                   KC-10S.....................           1,799                            1,799
   232   0401314F                   OPERATIONAL SUPPORT AIRLIFT          48,453                           48,453
   233   0401318F                   CV-22......................          36,576                           36,576
   235   0408011F                   SPECIAL TACTICS / COMBAT              7,963                            7,963
                                     CONTROL.
   236   0702207F                   DEPOT MAINTENANCE (NON-IF).           1,525                            1,525
   237   0708610F                   LOGISTICS INFORMATION               112,676                          112,676
                                     TECHNOLOGY (LOGIT).
   238   0708611F                   SUPPORT SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT          12,657                           12,657
   239   0804743F                   OTHER FLIGHT TRAINING......           1,836                            1,836
   240   0808716F                   OTHER PERSONNEL ACTIVITIES.             121                              121
   241   0901202F                   JOINT PERSONNEL RECOVERY              5,911                            5,911
                                     AGENCY.
   242   0901218F                   CIVILIAN COMPENSATION                 3,604                            3,604
                                     PROGRAM.
   243   0901220F                   PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION...           4,598                            4,598
   244   0901226F                   AIR FORCE STUDIES AND                 1,103                            1,103
                                     ANALYSIS AGENCY.
   246   0901538F                   FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT                101,840                          101,840
                                     INFORMATION SYSTEMS
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
  246A   9999999999                 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS........      12,780,142                       12,780,142
         .........................     SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL          17,010,339          29,200       17,039,539
                                       SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         .........................
         .........................       TOTAL RESEARCH,             26,473,669        -515,700       25,957,969
                                         DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                         EVAL, AF.
         .........................
         .........................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST
                                     & EVAL, DW
         .........................  BASIC RESEARCH
   001   0601000BR                  DTRA BASIC RESEARCH                  38,436                           38,436
                                     INITIATIVE.
   002   0601101E                   DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES..         333,119                          333,119
   003   0601110D8Z                 BASIC RESEARCH INITIATIVES.          42,022                           42,022
   004   0601117E                   BASIC OPERATIONAL MEDICAL            56,544                           56,544
                                     RESEARCH SCIENCE.
   005   0601120D8Z                 NATIONAL DEFENSE EDUCATION           49,453          10,000           59,453
                                     PROGRAM.
         .........................      STEM program increase..                         [10,000]
   006   0601228D8Z                 HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES          25,834          10,000           35,834
                                     AND UNIVERSITIES/MINORITY
                                     INSTITUTIONS.
         .........................      Program increase.......                         [10,000]
   007   0601384BP                  CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL              46,261                           46,261
                                     DEFENSE PROGRAM.
         .........................     SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH.         591,669          20,000          611,669
         .........................
         .........................  APPLIED RESEARCH
   008   0602000D8Z                 JOINT MUNITIONS TECHNOLOGY.          19,352                           19,352
   009   0602115E                   BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY......         114,262                          114,262
   010   0602234D8Z                 LINCOLN LABORATORY RESEARCH          51,026                           51,026
                                     PROGRAM.
   011   0602251D8Z                 APPLIED RESEARCH FOR THE             48,226                           48,226
                                     ADVANCEMENT OF S&T
                                     PRIORITIES.
   012   0602303E                   INFORMATION &                       356,358                          356,358
                                     COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY.
   014   0602383E                   BIOLOGICAL WARFARE DEFENSE.          29,265                           29,265
   015   0602384BP                  CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL             208,111                          208,111
                                     DEFENSE PROGRAM.
   016   0602668D8Z                 CYBER SECURITY RESEARCH....          13,727                           13,727
   018   0602702E                   TACTICAL TECHNOLOGY........         314,582                          314,582
   019   0602715E                   MATERIALS AND BIOLOGICAL            220,115         -25,000          195,115
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
         .........................      Program decrease.......                        [-25,000]
   020   0602716E                   ELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGY.....         174,798                          174,798
   021   0602718BR                  WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION         155,415                          155,415
                                     DEFEAT TECHNOLOGIES.
   022   0602751D8Z                 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING                  8,824                            8,824
                                     INSTITUTE (SEI) APPLIED
                                     RESEARCH.
   023   1160401BB                  SOF TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.          37,517                           37,517
         .........................     SUBTOTAL APPLIED               1,751,578         -25,000        1,726,578
                                       RESEARCH.
         .........................
         .........................  ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                     DEVELOPMENT
   024   0603000D8Z                 JOINT MUNITIONS ADVANCED             25,915                           25,915
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   026   0603122D8Z                 COMBATING TERRORISM                  71,171          65,000          136,171
                                     TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT.
         .........................      Anti-Tunneling Defense                          [40,000]
                                        System.
         .........................      Increase for Combating                          [25,000]
                                        Terrorism Technology
                                        Activities.
   027   0603133D8Z                 FOREIGN COMPARATIVE TESTING          21,782                           21,782
   028   0603160BR                  COUNTERPROLIFERATION                290,654                          290,654
                                     INITIATIVES--PROLIFERATION
                                     PREVENTION AND DEFEAT.
   030   0603176C                   ADVANCED CONCEPTS AND                12,139                           12,139
                                     PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT.
   031   0603177C                   DISCRIMINATION SENSOR                28,200                           28,200
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   032   0603178C                   WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY.........          45,389         -42,258            3,131
         .........................      High Power Directed                            [-30,291]
                                        Energy--Missile
                                        Destruct.
         .........................      Move to support                                [-11,967]
                                        Multiple Object Kill
                                        Vehicle.
   033   0603179C                   ADVANCED C4ISR.............           9,876                            9,876
   034   0603180C                   ADVANCED RESEARCH..........          17,364                           17,364
   035   0603225D8Z                 JOINT DOD-DOE MUNITIONS              18,802                           18,802
                                     TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   036   0603264S                   AGILE TRANSPORTATION FOR              2,679                            2,679
                                     THE 21ST CENTURY (AT21)--
                                     THEATER CAPABILITY.
   037   0603274C                   SPECIAL PROGRAM--MDA                 64,708                           64,708
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   038   0603286E                   ADVANCED AEROSPACE SYSTEMS.         185,043                          185,043
   039   0603287E                   SPACE PROGRAMS AND                  126,692                          126,692
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   040   0603288D8Z                 ANALYTIC ASSESSMENTS.......          14,645                           14,645
   041   0603289D8Z                 ADVANCED INNOVATIVE                  59,830         -10,000           49,830
                                     ANALYSIS AND CONCEPTS.
         .........................      Program decrease.......                        [-10,000]
   042   0603294C                   COMMON KILL VEHICLE                  46,753         -44,558            2,195
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
         .........................      MOKV Concept                                   [-44,558]
                                        Development.
   043   0603384BP                  CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL             140,094                          140,094
                                     DEFENSE PROGRAM--ADVANCED
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   044   0603527D8Z                 RETRACT LARCH..............         118,666         -10,000          108,666
         .........................      Program decrease.......                        [-10,000]
   045   0603618D8Z                 JOINT ELECTRONIC ADVANCED            43,966         -13,500           30,466
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
         .........................      Program decrease.......                        [-13,500]
   046   0603648D8Z                 JOINT CAPABILITY TECHNOLOGY         141,540         -12,000          129,540
                                     DEMONSTRATIONS.
         .........................      Program decrease.......                        [-12,000]
   047   0603662D8Z                 NETWORKED COMMUNICATIONS              6,980                            6,980
                                     CAPABILITIES.
   050   0603680D8Z                 DEFENSE-WIDE MANUFACTURING          157,056         -15,000          142,056
                                     SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
                                     PROGRAM.
         .........................      Unjustified growth.....                        [-15,000]
   051   0603699D8Z                 EMERGING CAPABILITIES                33,515          10,000           43,515
                                     TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         .........................      Efforts to counter-ISIL                         [10,000]
                                        and Russian aggression.
   052   0603712S                   GENERIC LOGISTICS R&D                16,543                           16,543
                                     TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATIONS.
   053   0603713S                   DEPLOYMENT AND DISTRIBUTION          29,888                           29,888
                                     ENTERPRISE TECHNOLOGY.
   054   0603716D8Z                 STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL              65,836                           65,836
                                     RESEARCH PROGRAM.
   055   0603720S                   MICROELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGY          79,037          20,000           99,037
                                     DEVELOPMENT AND SUPPORT.
         .........................      Trusted Source                                  [20,000]
                                        Implementation for
                                        Field Programmable Gate
                                        Arrays Study.
   056   0603727D8Z                 JOINT WARFIGHTING PROGRAM..           9,626                            9,626
   057   0603739E                   ADVANCED ELECTRONICS                 79,021                           79,021
                                     TECHNOLOGIES.
   058   0603760E                   COMMAND, CONTROL AND                201,335                          201,335
                                     COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS.
   059   0603766E                   NETWORK-CENTRIC WARFARE             452,861         -25,000          427,861
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
         .........................      Excessive program                              [-25,000]
                                        growth.
   060   0603767E                   SENSOR TECHNOLOGY..........         257,127                          257,127
   061   0603769SE                  DISTRIBUTED LEARNING                 10,771                           10,771
                                     ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   062   0603781D8Z                 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING                 15,202                           15,202
                                     INSTITUTE.
   063   0603826D8Z                 QUICK REACTION SPECIAL               90,500         -20,000           70,500
                                     PROJECTS.
         .........................      Unjustified growth.....                        [-20,000]
   066   0603833D8Z                 ENGINEERING SCIENCE &                18,377                           18,377
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   067   0603941D8Z                 TEST & EVALUATION SCIENCE &          82,589                           82,589
                                     TECHNOLOGY.
   068   0604055D8Z                 OPERATIONAL ENERGY                   37,420                           37,420
                                     CAPABILITY IMPROVEMENT.
   069   0303310D8Z                 CWMD SYSTEMS...............          42,488                           42,488
   070   1160402BB                  SOF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY              57,741                           57,741
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
         .........................     SUBTOTAL ADVANCED              3,229,821         -97,316        3,132,505
                                       TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         .........................
         .........................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                     DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPES
   071   0603161D8Z                 NUCLEAR AND CONVENTIONAL             31,710                           31,710
                                     PHYSICAL SECURITY
                                     EQUIPMENT RDT&E ADC&P.
   073   0603600D8Z                 WALKOFF....................          90,567                           90,567
   074   0603714D8Z                 ADVANCED SENSORS                     15,900           4,000           19,900
                                     APPLICATION PROGRAM.
         .........................      Advanced Sensors                                 [4,000]
                                        Application Program.
   075   0603851D8Z                 ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY               52,758                           52,758
                                     TECHNICAL CERTIFICATION
                                     PROGRAM.
   076   0603881C                   BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE           228,021                          228,021
                                     TERMINAL DEFENSE SEGMENT.
   077   0603882C                   BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE         1,284,891                        1,284,891
                                     MIDCOURSE DEFENSE SEGMENT.
  077A   0603XXXX                   MULTIPLE-OBJECT KILL                                 86,525           86,525
                                     VEHICLE.
         .........................      Adding from Weapons                             [11,967]
                                        Technology Line.
         .........................      Establish MOKV Program                          [74,558]
                                        of Record.
   078   0603884BP                  CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL             172,754                          172,754
                                     DEFENSE PROGRAM--DEM/VAL.
   079   0603884C                   BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE           233,588                          233,588
                                     SENSORS.
   080   0603890C                   BMD ENABLING PROGRAMS......         409,088                          409,088
  080A   0603XXXC                   WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY--HIGH                             30,291           30,291
                                     POWER DE.
         .........................      High Power Directed                             [30,291]
                                        Energy--Missile
                                        Destruct.
   081   0603891C                   SPECIAL PROGRAMS--MDA......         400,387                          400,387
   082   0603892C                   AEGIS BMD..................         843,355          27,320          870,675
         .........................      Undifferentiated Block                          [27,320]
                                        IB costs.
   083   0603893C                   SPACE TRACKING &                     31,632                           31,632
                                     SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM.
   084   0603895C                   BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE            23,289                           23,289
                                     SYSTEM SPACE PROGRAMS.
   085   0603896C                   BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE           450,085                          450,085
                                     COMMAND AND CONTROL,
                                     BATTLE MANAGEMENT AND
                                     COMMUNICATI.
   086   0603898C                   BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE            49,570                           49,570
                                     JOINT WARFIGHTER SUPPORT.
   087   0603904C                   MISSILE DEFENSE INTEGRATION          49,211                           49,211
                                     & OPERATIONS CENTER
                                     (MDIOC).
   088   0603906C                   REGARDING TRENCH...........           9,583                            9,583
   089   0603907C                   SEA BASED X-BAND RADAR               72,866                           72,866
                                     (SBX).
   090   0603913C                   ISRAELI COOPERATIVE                 102,795         164,800          267,595
                                     PROGRAMS.
         .........................      Arrow 3................                         [19,500]
         .........................      Arrow System                                    [45,500]
                                        Improvement Program.
         .........................      David's Sling..........                         [99,800]
   091   0603914C                   BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE           274,323                          274,323
                                     TEST.
   092   0603915C                   BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE           513,256                          513,256
                                     TARGETS.
  092A   0603XXXC                   INF RESPONSE OPTION                                  25,000           25,000
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
         .........................      Program increase.......                         [25,000]
   093   0603920D8Z                 HUMANITARIAN DEMINING......          10,129                           10,129
   094   0603923D8Z                 COALITION WARFARE..........          10,350                           10,350
   095   0604016D8Z                 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE                 1,518           5,000            6,518
                                     CORROSION PROGRAM.
         .........................      Corrosion..............                          [5,000]
   096   0604115C                   TECHNOLOGY MATURATION                96,300                           96,300
                                     INITIATIVES.
   097   0604250D8Z                 ADVANCED INNOVATIVE                 469,798                          469,798
                                     TECHNOLOGIES.
   098   0604400D8Z                 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD)           3,129                            3,129
                                     UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM
                                     (UAS) COMMON DEVELOPMENT.
   103   0604826J                   JOINT C5 CAPABILITY                  25,200                           25,200
                                     DEVELOPMENT, INTEGRATION
                                     AND INTEROPERABILITY
                                     ASSESSMENTS.
   105   0604873C                   LONG RANGE DISCRIMINATION           137,564                          137,564
                                     RADAR (LRDR).
   106   0604874C                   IMPROVED HOMELAND DEFENSE           278,944                          278,944
                                     INTERCEPTORS.
   107   0604876C                   BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE            26,225                           26,225
                                     TERMINAL DEFENSE SEGMENT
                                     TEST.
   108   0604878C                   AEGIS BMD TEST.............          55,148                           55,148
   109   0604879C                   BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE            86,764                           86,764
                                     SENSOR TEST.
   110   0604880C                   LAND-BASED SM-3 (LBSM3)....          34,970                           34,970
   111   0604881C                   AEGIS SM-3 BLOCK IIA CO-            172,645                          172,645
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   112   0604887C                   BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE            64,618                           64,618
                                     MIDCOURSE SEGMENT TEST.
   114   0303191D8Z                 JOINT ELECTROMAGNETIC                 2,660                            2,660
                                     TECHNOLOGY (JET) PROGRAM.
   115   0305103C                   CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE..             963                              963
         .........................     SUBTOTAL ADVANCED              6,816,554         342,936        7,159,490
                                       COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT
                                       AND PROTOTYPES.
         .........................
         .........................  SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND
                                     DEMONSTRATION
   116   0604161D8Z                 NUCLEAR AND CONVENTIONAL              8,800                            8,800
                                     PHYSICAL SECURITY
                                     EQUIPMENT RDT&E SDD.
   117   0604165D8Z                 PROMPT GLOBAL STRIKE                 78,817                           78,817
                                     CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT.
   118   0604384BP                  CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL             303,647                          303,647
                                     DEFENSE PROGRAM--EMD.
   119   0604764K                   ADVANCED IT SERVICES JOINT           23,424                           23,424
                                     PROGRAM OFFICE (AITS-JPO).
   120   0604771D8Z                 JOINT TACTICAL INFORMATION           14,285                           14,285
                                     DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
                                     (JTIDS).
   121   0605000BR                  WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION           7,156                            7,156
                                     DEFEAT CAPABILITIES.
   122   0605013BL                  INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY               12,542                           12,542
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   123   0605021SE                  HOMELAND PERSONNEL SECURITY             191                              191
                                     INITIATIVE.
   124   0605022D8Z                 DEFENSE EXPORTABILITY                 3,273                            3,273
                                     PROGRAM.
   125   0605027D8Z                 OUSD(C) IT DEVELOPMENT                5,962                            5,962
                                     INITIATIVES.
   126   0605070S                   DOD ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS               13,412                           13,412
                                     DEVELOPMENT AND
                                     DEMONSTRATION.
   127   0605075D8Z                 DCMO POLICY AND INTEGRATION           2,223                            2,223
   128   0605080S                   DEFENSE AGENCY INTIATIVES            31,660                           31,660
                                     (DAI)--FINANCIAL SYSTEM.
   129   0605090S                   DEFENSE RETIRED AND                  13,085                           13,085
                                     ANNUITANT PAY SYSTEM
                                     (DRAS).
   130   0605210D8Z                 DEFENSE-WIDE ELECTRONIC               7,209                            7,209
                                     PROCUREMENT CAPABILITIES.
   131   0303141K                   GLOBAL COMBAT SUPPORT                15,158                           15,158
                                     SYSTEM.
   132   0305304D8Z                 DOD ENTERPRISE ENERGY                 4,414                            4,414
                                     INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
                                     (EEIM).
         .........................     SUBTOTAL SYSTEM                  545,258                          545,258
                                       DEVELOPMENT AND
                                       DEMONSTRATION.
         .........................
         .........................  MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
   133   0604774D8Z                 DEFENSE READINESS REPORTING           5,581                            5,581
                                     SYSTEM (DRRS).
   134   0604875D8Z                 JOINT SYSTEMS ARCHITECTURE            3,081                            3,081
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   135   0604940D8Z                 CENTRAL TEST AND EVALUATION         229,125                          229,125
                                     INVESTMENT DEVELOPMENT
                                     (CTEIP).
   136   0604942D8Z                 ASSESSMENTS AND EVALUATIONS          28,674          -7,000           21,674
         .........................      Program decrease.......                         [-7,000]
   138   0605100D8Z                 JOINT MISSION ENVIRONMENT            45,235                           45,235
                                     TEST CAPABILITY (JMETC).
   139   0605104D8Z                 TECHNICAL STUDIES, SUPPORT           24,936                           24,936
                                     AND ANALYSIS.
   141   0605126J                   JOINT INTEGRATED AIR AND             35,471                           35,471
                                     MISSILE DEFENSE
                                     ORGANIZATION (JIAMDO).
   144   0605142D8Z                 SYSTEMS ENGINEERING........          37,655                           37,655
   145   0605151D8Z                 STUDIES AND ANALYSIS                  3,015                            3,015
                                     SUPPORT--OSD.
   146   0605161D8Z                 NUCLEAR MATTERS-PHYSICAL              5,287                            5,287
                                     SECURITY.
   147   0605170D8Z                 SUPPORT TO NETWORKS AND               5,289                            5,289
                                     INFORMATION INTEGRATION.
   148   0605200D8Z                 GENERAL SUPPORT TO USD                2,120                            2,120
                                     (INTELLIGENCE).
   149   0605384BP                  CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL             102,264                          102,264
                                     DEFENSE PROGRAM.
   158   0605790D8Z                 SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION             2,169                            2,169
                                     RESEARCH (SBIR)/ SMALL
                                     BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY
                                     TRANSFER.
   159   0605798D8Z                 DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY ANALYSIS          13,960                           13,960
   160   0605801KA                  DEFENSE TECHNICAL                    51,775                           51,775
                                     INFORMATION CENTER (DTIC).
   161   0605803SE                  R&D IN SUPPORT OF DOD                 9,533                            9,533
                                     ENLISTMENT, TESTING AND
                                     EVALUATION.
   162   0605804D8Z                 DEVELOPMENT TEST AND                 17,371           4,000           21,371
                                     EVALUATION.
         .........................      Program increase.......                          [4,000]
   163   0605898E                   MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D.........          71,571                           71,571
   164   0606100D8Z                 BUDGET AND PROGRAM                    4,123                            4,123
                                     ASSESSMENTS.
   165   0203345D8Z                 DEFENSE OPERATIONS SECURITY           1,946                            1,946
                                     INITIATIVE (DOSI).
   166   0204571J                   JOINT STAFF ANALYTICAL                7,673                            7,673
                                     SUPPORT.
   169   0303166J                   SUPPORT TO INFORMATION               10,413                           10,413
                                     OPERATIONS (IO)
                                     CAPABILITIES.
   170   0303260D8Z                 DEFENSE MILITARY DECEPTION              971                              971
                                     PROGRAM OFFICE (DMDPO).
   171   0305193D8Z                 CYBER INTELLIGENCE.........           6,579                            6,579
   173   0804767D8Z                 COCOM EXERCISE ENGAGEMENT            43,811                           43,811
                                     AND TRAINING
                                     TRANSFORMATION (CE2T2)--
                                     MHA.
   174   0901598C                   MANAGEMENT HQ--MDA.........          35,871                           35,871
   176   0903230D8W                 WHS--MISSION OPERATIONS               1,072                            1,072
                                     SUPPORT - IT.
  177A   9999999999                 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS........          49,500                           49,500
         .........................     SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT              856,071          -3,000          853,071
                                       SUPPORT.
         .........................
         .........................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEM
                                     DEVELOPMENT
   178   0604130V                   ENTERPRISE SECURITY SYSTEM            7,929                            7,929
                                     (ESS).
   179   0605127T                   REGIONAL INTERNATIONAL                1,750                            1,750
                                     OUTREACH (RIO) AND
                                     PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE
                                     INFORMATION MANA.
   180   0605147T                   OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN                   294                              294
                                     ASSISTANCE SHARED
                                     INFORMATION SYSTEM
                                     (OHASIS).
   181   0607210D8Z                 INDUSTRIAL BASE ANALYSIS             22,576                           22,576
                                     AND SUSTAINMENT SUPPORT.
   182   0607310D8Z                 CWMD SYSTEMS: OPERATIONAL             1,901                            1,901
                                     SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
   183   0607327T                   GLOBAL THEATER SECURITY               8,474                            8,474
                                     COOPERATION MANAGEMENT
                                     INFORMATION SYSTEMS (G-
                                     TSCMIS).
   184   0607384BP                  CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL              33,561                           33,561
                                     DEFENSE (OPERATIONAL
                                     SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT).
   186   0208043J                   PLANNING AND DECISION AID             3,061                            3,061
                                     SYSTEM (PDAS).
   187   0208045K                   C4I INTEROPERABILITY.......          64,921                           64,921
   189   0301144K                   JOINT/ALLIED COALITION                3,645                            3,645
                                     INFORMATION SHARING.
   193   0302016K                   NATIONAL MILITARY COMMAND               963                              963
                                     SYSTEM-WIDE SUPPORT.
   194   0302019K                   DEFENSE INFO INFRASTRUCTURE          10,186                           10,186
                                     ENGINEERING AND
                                     INTEGRATION.
   195   0303126K                   LONG-HAUL COMMUNICATIONS--           36,883                           36,883
                                     DCS.
   196   0303131K                   MINIMUM ESSENTIAL EMERGENCY          13,735                           13,735
                                     COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK
                                     (MEECN).
   197   0303135G                   PUBLIC KEY INFRASTRUCTURE             6,101                            6,101
                                     (PKI).
   198   0303136G                   KEY MANAGEMENT                       43,867                           43,867
                                     INFRASTRUCTURE (KMI).
   199   0303140D8Z                 INFORMATION SYSTEMS                   8,957                            8,957
                                     SECURITY PROGRAM.
   200   0303140G                   INFORMATION SYSTEMS                 146,890                          146,890
                                     SECURITY PROGRAM.
   201   0303150K                   GLOBAL COMMAND AND CONTROL           21,503                           21,503
                                     SYSTEM.
   202   0303153K                   DEFENSE SPECTRUM                     20,342                           20,342
                                     ORGANIZATION.
   203   0303170K                   NET-CENTRIC ENTERPRISE                  444                              444
                                     SERVICES (NCES).
   205   0303610K                   TELEPORT PROGRAM...........           1,736                            1,736
   206   0304210BB                  SPECIAL APPLICATIONS FOR             65,060         -45,600           19,460
                                     CONTINGENCIES.
         .........................      Ahead of need..........                        [-45,600]
   210   0305103K                   CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE..           2,976                            2,976
   215   0305186D8Z                 POLICY R&D PROGRAMS........           4,182                            4,182
   216   0305199D8Z                 NET CENTRICITY.............          18,130                           18,130
   218   0305208BB                  DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/            5,302                            5,302
                                     SURFACE SYSTEMS.
   221   0305208K                   DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/            3,239                            3,239
                                     SURFACE SYSTEMS.
   225   0305327V                   INSIDER THREAT.............          11,733                           11,733
   226   0305387D8Z                 HOMELAND DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY           2,119                            2,119
                                     TRANSFER PROGRAM.
   234   0708011S                   INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS....          24,605           4,000           28,605
         .........................      Casting Solutions for                            [4,000]
                                        Readiness Program.
   235   0708012S                   LOGISTICS SUPPORT                     1,770                            1,770
                                     ACTIVITIES.
   236   0902298J                   MANAGEMENT HQ--OJCS........           2,978                            2,978
   237   1105219BB                  MQ-9 UAV...................          18,151           5,000           23,151
         .........................      Medium Altitude Long                             [5,000]
                                        Endurance Tactical
                                        (MALET) MQ-9 Unmanned
                                        Aerial Vehicle.
   238   1105232BB                  RQ-11 UAV..................             758                              758
   240   1160403BB                  AVIATION SYSTEMS...........         173,934          15,200          189,134
         .........................      MC-130 Terrain                                  [15,200]
                                        Following/Terrain
                                        Avoidance Radar Program.
   241   1160405BB                  INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS                  6,866                            6,866
                                     DEVELOPMENT.
   242   1160408BB                  OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS...          63,008                           63,008
   243   1160431BB                  WARRIOR SYSTEMS............          25,342                           25,342
   244   1160432BB                  SPECIAL PROGRAMS...........           3,401                            3,401
   245   1160480BB                  SOF TACTICAL VEHICLES......           3,212                            3,212
   246   1160483BB                  MARITIME SYSTEMS...........          63,597           1,000           64,597
         .........................      Combat Diver...........                          [1,000]
   247   1160489BB                  GLOBAL VIDEO SURVEILLANCE             3,933                            3,933
                                     ACTIVITIES.
   248   1160490BB                  OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS             10,623                           10,623
                                     INTELLIGENCE.
  248A   9999999999                 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS........       3,564,272                        3,564,272
         .........................     SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL           4,538,910         -20,400        4,518,510
                                       SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
         .........................
         .........................       TOTAL RESEARCH,             18,329,861         217,220       18,547,081
                                         DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                         EVAL, DW.
         .........................
         .........................  OPERATIONAL TEST & EVAL,
                                     DEFENSE
         .........................  MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
   001   0605118OTE                 OPERATIONAL TEST AND                 76,838                           76,838
                                     EVALUATION.
   002   0605131OTE                 LIVE FIRE TEST AND                   46,882                           46,882
                                     EVALUATION.
   003   0605814OTE                 OPERATIONAL TEST ACTIVITIES          46,838                           46,838
                                     AND ANALYSES.
         .........................     SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT              170,558                          170,558
                                       SUPPORT.
         .........................
         .........................       TOTAL OPERATIONAL TEST         170,558                          170,558
                                         & EVAL, DEFENSE.
         .........................
         .........................       TOTAL RDT&E...........      69,779,182      -1,426,673       68,352,509
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SEC. 4202. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
 


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  SEC. 4202. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS  (In Thousands of
                                                    Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     FY 2016                           House
  Line       Program  Element                  Item                  Request      House  Change     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         ........................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                    DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
   060   0603747A                  SOLDIER SUPPORT AND                    1,500                            1,500
                                    SURVIVABILITY.
         ........................     SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                   1,500                            1,500
                                      COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
                                      PROTOTYPES.
         ........................
         ........................       TOTAL RESEARCH,                   1,500                            1,500
                                        DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                        EVAL, ARMY.
         ........................
         ........................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
                                    DEVELOPMENT
  231A   9999999999                CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.........          35,747                           35,747
         ........................     SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL               35,747                           35,747
                                      SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         ........................
         ........................       TOTAL RESEARCH,                  35,747                           35,747
                                        DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                        EVAL, NAVY.
         ........................
         ........................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
                                    DEVELOPMENT
   133   0205671F                  JOINT COUNTER RCIED                      300                              300
                                    ELECTRONIC WARFARE.
  246A   9999999999                CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.........          16,800                           16,800
         ........................     SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL               17,100                           17,100
                                      SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         ........................
         ........................       TOTAL RESEARCH,                  17,100                           17,100
                                        DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                        EVAL, AF.
         ........................
         ........................  ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                    DEVELOPMENT
   026   0603122D8Z                COMBATING TERRORISM                                   25,000           25,000
                                    TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT.
         ........................      Combating Terrorism and                          [25,000]
                                       Technical Support Office.
         ........................     SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                                  25,000           25,000
                                      TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         ........................
         ........................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEM
                                    DEVELOPMENT
  248A   9999999999                CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.........         137,087                          137,087
         ........................     SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL              137,087                          137,087
                                      SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
         ........................
         ........................       TOTAL RESEARCH,                 137,087          25,000          162,087
                                        DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                        EVAL, DW.
         ........................
         ........................       TOTAL RDT&E............         191,434          25,000          216,434
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
 


SEC. 4301. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.
 


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         SEC. 4301. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   FY 2016                            House
    Line                           Item                            Request      House  Change      Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   MANEUVER UNITS..................................       1,094,429         500,000          1,594,429
                 Force Readiness Restoration--Operations                             [500,000]
                 Tempo.......................................
       060   AVIATION ASSETS.................................       1,546,129         141,700          1,687,829
                 Flying Hour Program Restoration Unfunded                             [55,000]
                 Requirement.................................
                 H-60 A-L Conversion Acceleration............                         [86,700]
       070   FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..............       3,158,606         114,000          3,272,606
                 Army Reserve cyber education efforts........                          [6,000]
                 Insider Threat Unfunded Requirements........                         [80,000]
                 Open Source Intelligence/Human Terrain                               [28,000]
                 Systems Unfunded Requirements...............
       090   LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE...................       1,214,116           1,730          1,215,846
                 Gun Tube Depot Maintenance Shortfall                                  [1,730]
                 Recovery Acceleration.......................
       100   BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.........................       7,616,008          -8,500          7,607,508
                 Public Affairs at Local Installations                                [-8,500]
                 Unjustified Growth..........................
       110   FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION &                  2,617,169         192,700          2,809,869
              MODERNIZATION..................................
                 GTMO Critical Building Maintenance..........                         [20,500]
                 Restore Sustainment shortfalls..............                        [172,200]
       170   COMBATANT COMMANDS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT.......         448,633          21,000            469,633
                 Afloat Forward Staging Base Unfunded                                 [21,000]
                 Requirement.................................
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................      17,695,090         962,630         18,657,720
 
             TRAINING AND RECRUITING
       250   SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING......................         981,000           9,800            990,800
                 Cyber Defender (25D) Series Course..........                          [9,800]
       260   FLIGHT TRAINING.................................         940,872          43,600            984,472
                 Cyber Basic Officer Leadership Course.......                          [3,100]
                 Initial Entry Rotary Wing Training Backlog                           [40,500]
                 Reduction...................................
       270   PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION..............         230,324          17,300            247,624
                 Advanced Civil Schooling - Civilian Graduate                         [-3,000]
                 School 10 Percent Reduction.................
                 Unmanned Aircraft Systems Training..........                         [20,300]
       280   TRAINING SUPPORT................................         603,519          28,000            631,519
                 Intelligence Support for PACOM Unfunded                              [28,000]
                 Requirement.................................
       290   RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING......................         491,922                            491,922
       330   JUNIOR RESERVE OFFICER TRAINING CORPS...........         170,118                            170,118
                 SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING............       3,417,755          98,700          3,516,455
 
             ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES
       370   LOGISTIC SUPPORT ACTIVITIES.....................         714,781             360            715,141
                 TRADOC Mobile Training Team (MTT) Support                               [360]
                 Unfunded Requirement........................
       390   ADMINISTRATION..................................         384,813          -8,500            376,313
                 Unjustified Growth in Public Affairs........                         [-8,500]
       430   OTHER SERVICE SUPPORT...........................       1,119,848          -4,500          1,115,348
                 Spirit of America program growth............                         [-4,500]
       530   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.............................         490,368                            490,368
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES.........       2,709,810         -12,640          2,697,170
 
             UNDISTRIBUTED
       540   UNDISTRIBUTED...................................                      -1,107,000         -1,107,000
                 Excessive standard price for fuel...........                        [-83,400]
                 Foreign Currency adjustments................                       [-431,000]
                 Prohibition on Per Diem Allowance Reduction.                          [3,300]
                 Unobligated balances........................                       [-595,900]
                 SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED......................                      -1,107,000         -1,107,000
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY........      23,822,655         -58,310         23,764,345
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES
             OPERATING FORCES
       060   AVIATION ASSETS.................................          87,587                             87,587
       090   LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE...................          59,574                             59,574
       100   BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.........................         570,852                            570,852
       110   FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION &                    245,686          13,600            259,286
              MODERNIZATION..................................
                 Restore Sustainment shortfalls..............                         [13,600]
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................         963,699          13,600            977,299
 
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       140   ADMINISTRATION..................................          18,390                             18,390
       170   RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING......................          52,928                             52,928
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........          71,318                             71,318
 
             UNDISTRIBUTED
       190   UNDISTRIBUTED...................................                          -7,600             -7,600
                 Excessive standard price for fuel...........                         [-7,600]
                 SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED......................                          -7,600             -7,600
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES....       1,035,017           6,000          1,041,017
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   MANEUVER UNITS..................................         709,433         385,100          1,094,533
                 Increased Operations Tempo to Meet Readiness                        [385,100]
                 Objectives..................................
       060   AVIATION ASSETS.................................         943,609         119,400          1,063,009
                 C3 High Frequency Radio System Unfunded                               [5,600]
                 Requirement.................................
                 Operational Support and Initial Entry Rotary                         [69,900]
                 Wing Training...............................
                 Restoration of Flying Hours Unfunded                                 [43,900]
                 Requirement.................................
       090   LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE...................         166,848                            166,848
       100   BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.........................       1,022,970                          1,022,970
       110   FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION &                    673,680          35,200            708,880
              MODERNIZATION..................................
                 Restore Sustainment shortfalls..............                         [35,200]
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................       3,516,540         539,700          4,056,240
 
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       140   ADMINISTRATION..................................          59,629            -410             59,219
                 National Guard State Partnership Program                              [1,000]
                 increase....................................
                 NGB Heritage Painting Program...............                         [-1,410]
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........          59,629            -410             59,219
 
             UNDISTRIBUTED
       200   UNDISTRIBUTED...................................                         -25,300            -25,300
                 Excessive standard price for fuel...........                        [-25,300]
                 SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED......................                         -25,300            -25,300
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG........       3,576,169         513,990          4,090,159
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT OPERATIONS.............       4,940,365           3,300          4,943,665
                 Aviation Readiness Restoration--CH-53                                 [3,300]
                 Contract Maintenance........................
       020   FLEET AIR TRAINING..............................       1,830,611                          1,830,611
       040   AIR OPERATIONS AND SAFETY SUPPORT...............         103,456           6,800            110,256
                 MV-22 Fleet Engineering Support Unfunded                              [6,800]
                 Requirement.................................
       050   AIR SYSTEMS SUPPORT.............................         376,844          13,900            390,744
                 Aviation Readiness Restoration--AV-8B                                 [4,000]
                 Program Related Logistics...................
                 Aviation Readiness Restoration--CH-53                                 [1,900]
                 Program Related Logisitics..................
                 Aviation Readiness Restoration--MV-22                                 [1,200]
                 Program Related Logisitics..................
                 MV-22 Fleet Engineering Support Unfunded                              [6,800]
                 Requirement.................................
       060   AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE......................         897,536          17,000            914,536
                 Aviation Readiness Restoration--AV-8B Depot                          [11,200]
                 Maintenance.................................
                 Aviation Readiness Restoration--CH-53 Depot                           [1,000]
                 Maintenance.................................
                 Aviation Readiness Restoration--F-18 Depot                            [4,800]
                 Maintenance.................................
       080   AVIATION LOGISTICS..............................         544,056          11,900            555,956
                 Aviation Readiness Restoration--MV-22                                 [5,300]
                 Aviation Logisitics.........................
                 KC-130J Aviation Logistics Unfunded                                   [6,600]
                 Requirement.................................
       090   MISSION AND OTHER SHIP OPERATIONS...............       4,287,658                          4,287,658
       110   SHIP DEPOT MAINTENANCE..........................       5,960,951                          5,960,951
       120   SHIP DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT...................       1,554,863                          1,554,863
       200   DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT........................           2,443                              2,443
       220   COMBATANT COMMANDERS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT.....          73,110                             73,110
       230   CRUISE MISSILE..................................         110,734                            110,734
       240   FLEET BALLISTIC MISSILE.........................       1,206,736                          1,206,736
       260   WEAPONS MAINTENANCE.............................         523,122          12,000            535,122
                 Ship Self-Defense Systems Maintenance                                [12,000]
                 Backlog Reduction...........................
       290   SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION......       2,220,423          25,300          2,245,723
                 Restore Sustainment shortfalls..............                         [25,300]
       300   BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..........................       4,472,468                          4,472,468
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................      29,105,376          90,200         29,195,576
 
             MOBILIZATION
       320   AIRCRAFT ACTIVATIONS/INACTIVATIONS..............           6,464             500              6,964
                 Aviation Readiness Restoration--F-18                                    [500]
                 Aircraft Activations/Inactivations..........
       330   SHIP ACTIVATIONS/INACTIVATIONS..................         361,764                            361,764
                 SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION.......................         368,228             500            368,728
 
             TRAINING AND RECRUITING
       380   RECRUIT TRAINING................................           9,035                              9,035
       410   FLIGHT TRAINING.................................           8,171                              8,171
       420   PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION..............         168,471         -15,500            152,971
                 Civilian Institutions Graduate Education                            [-16,500]
                 Program.....................................
                 Naval Sea Cadets............................                          [1,000]
       440   RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING......................         234,233             500            234,733
                  1-800 US Navy Call Center..................                            [500]
       470   JUNIOR ROTC.....................................          47,653                             47,653
                 SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING............         467,563         -15,000            452,563
 
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       480   ADMINISTRATION..................................         923,771          -9,000            914,771
                 Navy Fleet Band National Tours..............                         [-5,000]
                 Unjustified Growth External Relations.......                         [-3,500]
                 Unjustified Growth Navy Call Center.........                           [-500]
       490   EXTERNAL RELATIONS..............................          13,967          -3,500             10,467
                 Navy External Relations.....................                         [-3,500]
       520   OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT.........................         265,948          -5,000            260,948
                 Navy Fleet Band National Tour...............                         [-5,000]
       590   HULL, MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL SUPPORT.........          48,587                             48,587
       600   COMBAT/WEAPONS SYSTEMS..........................          25,599                             25,599
       610   SPACE AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE SYSTEMS............          72,768                             72,768
       620   NAVAL INVESTIGATIVE SERVICE.....................         577,803                            577,803
       710   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.............................         560,754                            560,754
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........       2,489,197         -17,500          2,471,697
 
             UNDISTRIBUTED
       720   UNDISTRIBUTED...................................                        -887,100           -887,100
                 Excessive standard price for fuel...........                       [-591,400]
                 Foreign Currency adjustments................                        [-87,000]
                 Prohibition on Per Diem Allowance Reduction.                          [2,300]
                 Unobligated balances........................                       [-211,000]
                 SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED......................                        -887,100           -887,100
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY........      32,430,364        -828,900         31,601,464
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   OPERATIONAL FORCES..............................         931,079                            931,079
       030   DEPOT MAINTENANCE...............................         227,583                            227,583
       050   SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION........         746,237          28,800            775,037
                 Restore Sustainment shortfalls..............                         [28,800]
       060   BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..........................       2,057,362                          2,057,362
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................       3,962,261          28,800          3,991,061
 
             TRAINING AND RECRUITING
       100   PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION..............          40,786                             40,786
       120   RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING......................         164,806                            164,806
       140   JUNIOR ROTC.....................................          23,397                             23,397
                 SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING............         228,989                            228,989
 
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       160   ADMINISTRATION..................................         358,395         -15,800            342,595
                 Unjustified Growth Marine Corps Heritage                            [-15,800]
                 Center......................................
       200   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.............................          45,429                             45,429
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........         403,824         -15,800            388,024
 
             UNDISTRIBUTED
       210   UNDISTRIBUTED...................................                        -338,200           -338,200
                 Excessive standard price for fuel...........                        [-24,600]
                 Foreign Currency adjustments................                        [-28,000]
                 Prohibition on Per Diem Allowance Reduction.                            [800]
                 Unobligated balances........................                       [-286,400]
                 SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED......................                        -338,200           -338,200
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS       4,595,074        -325,200          4,269,874
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT OPERATIONS.............         563,722          43,500            607,222
                 Reversing the disestablishment of HSC-84 and                         [43,500]
                 HSC-85......................................
       020   INTERMEDIATE MAINTENANCE........................           6,218                              6,218
       030   AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE......................          82,712                             82,712
       040   AIRCRAFT DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT...............             326                                326
       050   AVIATION LOGISTICS..............................          13,436                             13,436
       070   SHIP OPERATIONS SUPPORT & TRAINING..............             557                                557
       130   SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION......          48,513             700             49,213
                 Restore Sustainment shortfalls..............                            [700]
       140   BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..........................         102,858                            102,858
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................         818,342          44,200            862,542
 
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       150   ADMINISTRATION..................................           1,505                              1,505
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........           1,505                              1,505
 
             UNDISTRIBUTED
       210   UNDISTRIBUTED...................................                         -39,700            -39,700
                 Excessive standard price for fuel...........                        [-39,700]
                 SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED......................                         -39,700            -39,700
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES....         819,847           4,500            824,347
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   OPERATING FORCES................................          97,631                             97,631
       020   DEPOT MAINTENANCE...............................          18,254                             18,254
       030   SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION......          28,653           1,400             30,053
                 Restore Sustainment shortfalls..............                          [1,400]
       040   BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..........................         111,923                            111,923
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................         256,461           1,400            257,861
 
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       060   ADMINISTRATION..................................          10,866                             10,866
       070   RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING......................           8,785                              8,785
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........          19,651                             19,651
 
             UNDISTRIBUTED
       080   UNDISTRIBUTED...................................                          -1,000             -1,000
                 Excessive standard price for fuel...........                         [-1,000]
                 SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED......................                          -1,000             -1,000
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE..         276,112             400            276,512
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES...........................       3,336,868         275,600          3,612,468
                 A-10 restoration: Force Structure                                   [249,700]
                 Restoration.................................
                 A-10 to F-15E Training Transition...........                         [-1,400]
                 EC-130H Force Structure Restoration.........                         [27,300]
       020   COMBAT ENHANCEMENT FORCES.......................       1,897,315          37,700          1,935,015
                 Increase Range Use Support Unfunded                                  [37,700]
                 Requirement.................................
       030   AIR OPERATIONS TRAINING (OJT, MAINTAIN SKILLS)..       1,797,549         -78,200          1,719,349
                 A-10 to F-15E Training Transition...........                        [-78,200]
       040   DEPOT MAINTENANCE...............................       6,537,127                          6,537,127
       050   FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION &                  1,997,712         135,100          2,132,812
              MODERNIZATION..................................
                 Restore Sustainment shortfalls..............                        [135,100]
       060   BASE SUPPORT....................................       2,841,948                          2,841,948
       070   GLOBAL C3I AND EARLY WARNING....................         930,341                            930,341
       080   OTHER COMBAT OPS SPT PROGRAMS...................         924,845                            924,845
       120   COMBATANT COMMANDERS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT.....         900,965                            900,965
       135   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.............................         907,496                            907,496
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................      22,072,166         370,200         22,442,366
 
             MOBILIZATION
       160   DEPOT MAINTENANCE...............................       1,617,571                          1,617,571
       170   FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION &                    259,956                            259,956
              MODERNIZATION..................................
       180   BASE SUPPORT....................................         708,799                            708,799
                 SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION.......................       2,586,326                          2,586,326
 
             TRAINING AND RECRUITING
       220   FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION &                    228,500                            228,500
              MODERNIZATION..................................
       230   BASE SUPPORT....................................         772,870                            772,870
       240   SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING......................         359,304          20,000            379,304
                 Remotely Piloted Aircraft Flight Training                            [20,000]
                 Acceleration................................
       250   FLIGHT TRAINING.................................         710,553          16,000            726,553
                 Unmanned Aerial Surveillance (UAS) Training.                         [16,000]
       260   PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION..............         228,252            -930            227,322
                 Air Force Civilian Graduate Education                                  [-930]
                 Program Unjustified Growth..................
       280   DEPOT MAINTENANCE...............................         375,513                            375,513
       290   RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING......................          79,690                             79,690
       330   JUNIOR ROTC.....................................          59,263                             59,263
                 SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING............       2,813,945          35,070          2,849,015
 
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       340   LOGISTICS OPERATIONS............................       1,141,491                          1,141,491
       360   DEPOT MAINTENANCE...............................          61,745                             61,745
       370   FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION &                    298,759                            298,759
              MODERNIZATION..................................
       380   BASE SUPPORT....................................       1,108,220                          1,108,220
       390   ADMINISTRATION..................................         689,797         -20,700            669,097
                 Defense Enterprise Accounting and Management                        [-20,700]
                 System......................................
       420   CIVIL AIR PATROL................................          25,411           2,500             27,911
                 Civil Air Patrol............................                          [2,500]
       460   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.............................         519,626                            519,626
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........       3,845,049         -18,200          3,826,849
 
             UNDISTRIBUTED
       470   UNDISTRIBUTED...................................                        -813,600           -813,600
                 Excessive standard price for fuel...........                       [-562,100]
                 Foreign Currency adjustments................                       [-217,000]
                 Prohibition on Per Diem Allowance Reduction.                          [2,900]
                 Unobligated balances........................                        [-37,400]
                 SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED......................                        -813,600           -813,600
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE...      31,317,486        -426,530         30,890,956
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES...........................       1,779,378           2,500          1,781,878
                 A-10 restoration: Force Structure                                     [2,500]
                 Restoration.................................
       030   DEPOT MAINTENANCE...............................         487,036                            487,036
       040   FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION &                    109,342             300            109,642
              MODERNIZATION..................................
                 Restore Sustainment shortfalls..............                            [300]
       050   BASE SUPPORT....................................         373,707                            373,707
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................       2,749,463           2,800          2,752,263
 
             ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES
       060   ADMINISTRATION..................................          53,921                             53,921
       070   RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING......................          14,359                             14,359
                 SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE               68,280                             68,280
                 ACTIVITIES..................................
 
             UNDISTRIBUTED
       110   UNDISTRIBUTED...................................                        -101,000           -101,000
                 Excessive standard price for fuel...........                       [-101,000]
                 SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED......................                        -101,000           -101,000
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE..       2,817,743         -98,200          2,719,543
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS.............................       3,526,471          82,200          3,608,671
                 A-10 restoration: Force Structure                                    [42,200]
                 Restoration.................................
                 Aircraft Support Equipment Shortfall                                 [40,000]
                 Restoration.................................
       020   MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS......................         740,779                            740,779
       030   DEPOT MAINTENANCE...............................       1,763,859                          1,763,859
       040   FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION &                    288,786          18,800            307,586
              MODERNIZATION..................................
                 Restore Sustainment shortfalls..............                         [18,800]
       050   BASE SUPPORT....................................         582,037                            582,037
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................       6,901,932         101,000          7,002,932
 
             ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES
       060   ADMINISTRATION..................................          23,626           1,000             24,626
                 National Guard State Partnership Program                              [1,000]
                 increase....................................
       070   RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING......................          30,652                             30,652
                 SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE              54,278           1,000             55,278
                 ACTIVITIES..................................
 
             UNDISTRIBUTED
       080   UNDISTRIBUTED...................................                        -162,600           -162,600
                 Excessive standard price for fuel...........                       [-162,600]
                 SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED......................                        -162,600           -162,600
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG.........       6,956,210         -60,600          6,895,610
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE
             OPERATING FORCES
       020   OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE..............         534,795                            534,795
       030   SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND/OPERATING FORCES.....       4,862,368          84,600          4,946,968
                 Global Inform and Influence Activities                               [15,000]
                 Increase....................................
                 Increased Support for Counterterrorism                               [25,000]
                 Operations..................................
                 USSOCOM Combat Development Activities.......                         [44,600]
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................       5,397,163          84,600          5,481,763
 
             TRAINING AND RECRUITING
       060   SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND/TRAINING AND                  354,372                            354,372
              RECRUITING.....................................
                 SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING............         354,372                            354,372
 
             ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES
       070   CIVIL MILITARY PROGRAMS.........................         160,320          20,000            180,320
                 STARBASE....................................                         [20,000]
       100   DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT AGENCY..............       1,374,536                          1,374,536
       110   DEFENSE HUMAN RESOURCES ACTIVITY................         642,551           1,000            643,551
                 Critical Language Training..................                          [1,000]
       120   DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY..............       1,282,755          10,000          1,292,755
                 SHARKSEER...................................                         [10,000]
       150   DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY........................         366,429                            366,429
       160   DEFENSE MEDIA ACTIVITY..........................         192,625                            192,625
       190   DEFENSE SECURITY COOPERATION AGENCY.............         524,723                            524,723
       240   DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY.................         415,696                            415,696
       260   DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE EDUCATION ACTIVITY........       2,753,771                          2,753,771
       270   MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY..........................         432,068                            432,068
       290   OFFICE OF ECONOMIC ADJUSTMENT...................         110,612                            110,612
       295   OFFICE OF NET ASSESSMENT........................                           9,092              9,092
                 Transfer from line 300......................                          [9,092]
       300   OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE..............       1,388,285         -26,592          1,361,693
                 Commission to Assess the Threat to the U.S.                           [2,000]
                 from Electromagnetic Pulse Attack...........
                 OUSD AT&L Congressional Mandate (BRAC                               [-10,500]
                 Support)....................................
                 Program decrease............................                        [-24,000]
                 Readiness environmental protection                                   [15,000]
                 initiative--program increase................
                 Transfer funding for Office of Net                                   [-9,092]
                 Assessment to line 295......................
       310   SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND/ADMIN & SVC-WIDE               83,263                             83,263
              ACTIVITIES.....................................
       320   WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES................         621,688                            621,688
       330   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.............................      14,379,428           5,000         14,384,428
                 Program increase............................                          [5,000]
                 SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE           24,728,750          18,500         24,747,250
                 ACTIVITIES..................................
 
             UNDISTRIBUTED
       340   UNDISTRIBUTED...................................                        -494,700           -494,700
                 Excessive standard price for fuel...........                        [-29,700]
                 Foreign Currency adjustments................                        [-78,400]
                 Prohibition on Per Diem Allowance Reduction.                          [2,700]
                 Unobligated balances........................                       [-389,300]
                 SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED......................                        -494,700           -494,700
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE      30,480,285        -391,600         30,088,685
 
             MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
             MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
       020   OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER AND CIVIC AID...         100,266                            100,266
                 SUBTOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.......         100,266                            100,266
 
                  TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.........         100,266                            100,266
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE..............     138,227,228      -1,664,450        136,562,778
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SEC. 4302. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
 


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       SEC. 4302. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS  (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   FY 2016                            House
    Line                           Item                            Request      House  Change      Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   MANEUVER UNITS..................................         257,900                            257,900
       040   THEATER LEVEL ASSETS............................       1,110,836                          1,110,836
       050   LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT..................         261,943                            261,943
       060   AVIATION ASSETS.................................          22,160                             22,160
       070   FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..............       1,119,201                          1,119,201
       080   LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS...................         117,881                            117,881
       100   BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.........................          50,000                             50,000
       140   ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES...........................       4,500,666          25,800          4,526,466
                 Army expenses related to Syria Train and                             [25,800]
                 Equip program...............................
       150   COMMANDERS EMERGENCY RESPONSE PROGRAM...........          10,000          -5,000              5,000
                 Program decrease............................                         [-5,000]
       160   RESET...........................................       1,834,777                          1,834,777
       170   COMBATANT COMMANDS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT.......                         100,000            100,000
                 AFRICOM Intelligence, Surveilance, and                              [100,000]
                 Reconnissance...............................
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................       9,285,364         120,800          9,406,164
 
             MOBILIZATION
       190   ARMY PREPOSITIONED STOCKS.......................          40,000                             40,000
                 SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION.......................          40,000                             40,000
 
             ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES
       350   SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION......................         529,891                            529,891
       380   AMMUNITION MANAGEMENT...........................           5,033                              5,033
       420   OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT.........................         100,480                            100,480
       450   REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT..........................         154,350                            154,350
       530   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.............................       1,267,632                          1,267,632
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES.........       2,057,386                          2,057,386
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY........      11,382,750         120,800         11,503,550
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES
             OPERATING FORCES
       030   ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE..........................           2,442                              2,442
       050   LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT..................             813                                813
       070   FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..............             779                                779
       100   BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.........................          20,525                             20,525
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................          24,559                             24,559
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES....          24,559                             24,559
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   MANEUVER UNITS..................................           1,984                              1,984
       030   ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE..........................           4,671                              4,671
       060   AVIATION ASSETS.................................          15,980                             15,980
       070   FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..............          12,867                             12,867
       100   BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.........................          23,134                             23,134
       120   MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS.........           1,426                              1,426
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................          60,062                             60,062
 
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       150   SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS......................             783                                783
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........             783                                783
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG........          60,845                             60,845
 
             AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND
             MINISTRY OF DEFENSE
       010   SUSTAINMENT.....................................       2,214,899         337,743          2,552,642
                 Support for ANSF end strength...............                        [337,743]
       030   EQUIPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION....................         182,751                            182,751
       040   TRAINING AND OPERATIONS.........................         281,555                            281,555
                 SUBTOTAL MINISTRY OF DEFENSE................       2,679,205         337,743          3,016,948
 
             MINISTRY OF INTERIOR
       060   SUSTAINMENT.....................................         901,137                            901,137
       080   EQUIPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION....................         116,573                            116,573
       090   TRAINING AND OPERATIONS.........................          65,342                             65,342
                 SUBTOTAL MINISTRY OF INTERIOR...............       1,083,052                          1,083,052
 
                  TOTAL AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND.....       3,762,257         337,743          4,100,000
 
             IRAQ TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND
             IRAQ TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND
       010   IRAQ TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND.......................         715,000                            715,000
                 SUBTOTAL IRAQ TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND..........         715,000                            715,000
 
                  TOTAL IRAQ TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND............         715,000                            715,000
 
             SYRIA TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND
             SYRIA TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND
       010   SYRIA TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND......................         600,000         -68,550            531,450
                 Realignment to Air Force....................                        [-42,750]
                 Realignment to Army.........................                        [-25,800]
                 SUBTOTAL SYRIA TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND.........         600,000         -68,550            531,450
 
                  TOTAL SYRIA TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND...........         600,000         -68,550            531,450
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT OPERATIONS.............         358,417                            358,417
       030   AVIATION TECHNICAL DATA & ENGINEERING SERVICES..             110                                110
       040   AIR OPERATIONS AND SAFETY SUPPORT...............           4,513                              4,513
       050   AIR SYSTEMS SUPPORT.............................         126,501                            126,501
       060   AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE......................          75,897                             75,897
       070   AIRCRAFT DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT...............           2,770                              2,770
       080   AVIATION LOGISTICS..............................          34,101                             34,101
       090   MISSION AND OTHER SHIP OPERATIONS...............       1,184,878                          1,184,878
       100   SHIP OPERATIONS SUPPORT & TRAINING..............          16,663                             16,663
       110   SHIP DEPOT MAINTENANCE..........................       1,922,829                          1,922,829
       130   COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS...........................          33,577                             33,577
       160   WARFARE TACTICS.................................          26,454                             26,454
       170   OPERATIONAL METEOROLOGY AND OCEANOGRAPHY........          22,305                             22,305
       180   COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES...........................         513,969                            513,969
       190   EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE...........................          10,007                             10,007
       250   IN-SERVICE WEAPONS SYSTEMS SUPPORT..............          60,865                             60,865
       260   WEAPONS MAINTENANCE.............................         275,231                            275,231
       290   SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION......           7,819                              7,819
       300   BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..........................          61,422                             61,422
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................       4,738,328                          4,738,328
 
             MOBILIZATION
       340   EXPEDITIONARY HEALTH SERVICES SYSTEMS...........           5,307                              5,307
       360   COAST GUARD SUPPORT.............................         160,002                            160,002
                 SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION.......................         165,309                            165,309
 
             TRAINING AND RECRUITING
       400   SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING......................          44,845                             44,845
                 SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING............          44,845                             44,845
 
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       480   ADMINISTRATION..................................           2,513                              2,513
       490   EXTERNAL RELATIONS..............................             500                                500
       510   MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT......           5,309                              5,309
       520   OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT.........................           1,469                              1,469
       550   SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION......................         156,671                            156,671
       580   ACQUISITION AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT..............           8,834                              8,834
       620   NAVAL INVESTIGATIVE SERVICE.....................           1,490                              1,490
       710   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.............................           6,320                              6,320
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........         183,106                            183,106
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY........       5,131,588                          5,131,588
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   OPERATIONAL FORCES..............................         353,133                            353,133
       020   FIELD LOGISTICS.................................         259,676                            259,676
       030   DEPOT MAINTENANCE...............................         240,000                            240,000
       060   BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..........................          16,026                             16,026
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................         868,835                            868,835
 
             TRAINING AND RECRUITING
       110   TRAINING SUPPORT................................          37,862                             37,862
                 SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING............          37,862                             37,862
 
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       150   SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION......................          43,767                             43,767
       200   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.............................           2,070                              2,070
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........          45,837                             45,837
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS         952,534                            952,534
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT OPERATIONS.............           4,033                              4,033
       020   INTERMEDIATE MAINTENANCE........................              60                                 60
       030   AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE......................          20,300                             20,300
       100   COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES...........................           7,250                              7,250
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................          31,643                             31,643
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES....          31,643                             31,643
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   OPERATING FORCES................................           2,500                              2,500
       040   BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..........................             955                                955
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................           3,455                              3,455
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE..           3,455                              3,455
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES...........................       1,505,738          42,750          1,548,488
                 Air Force expenses related to Syria Train                            [42,750]
                 and Equip program...........................
       020   COMBAT ENHANCEMENT FORCES.......................         914,973                            914,973
       030   AIR OPERATIONS TRAINING (OJT, MAINTAIN SKILLS)..          31,978                             31,978
       040   DEPOT MAINTENANCE...............................       1,192,765                          1,192,765
       050   FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION &                     85,625                             85,625
              MODERNIZATION..................................
       060   BASE SUPPORT....................................         917,269                            917,269
       070   GLOBAL C3I AND EARLY WARNING....................          30,219                             30,219
       080   OTHER COMBAT OPS SPT PROGRAMS...................         174,734                            174,734
       100   LAUNCH FACILITIES...............................             869                                869
       110   SPACE CONTROL SYSTEMS...........................           5,008                              5,008
       120   COMBATANT COMMANDERS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT.....         100,190         616,500            716,690
                 Assistance for the border security of Jordan                        [300,000]
                 Jordanian Military Capability Enhancement...                        [300,000]
                 Support to Jordanian Training and Operations                         [16,500]
       135   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.............................          22,893                             22,893
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................       4,982,261         659,250          5,641,511
 
             MOBILIZATION
       140   AIRLIFT OPERATIONS..............................       2,995,703                          2,995,703
       150   MOBILIZATION PREPAREDNESS.......................         108,163                            108,163
       160   DEPOT MAINTENANCE...............................         511,059                            511,059
       180   BASE SUPPORT....................................           4,642                              4,642
                 SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION.......................       3,619,567                          3,619,567
 
             TRAINING AND RECRUITING
       190   OFFICER ACQUISITION.............................              92                                 92
       240   SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING......................          11,986                             11,986
                 SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING............          12,078                             12,078
 
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       340   LOGISTICS OPERATIONS............................          86,716                             86,716
       380   BASE SUPPORT....................................           3,836                              3,836
       400   SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS......................         165,348                            165,348
       410   OTHER SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES....................         204,683                            204,683
       450   INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT...........................              61                                 61
       460   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.............................          15,463                             15,463
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........         476,107                            476,107
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE...       9,090,013         659,250          9,749,263
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE
             OPERATING FORCES
       030   DEPOT MAINTENANCE...............................          51,086                             51,086
       050   BASE SUPPORT....................................           7,020                              7,020
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................          58,106                             58,106
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE..          58,106                             58,106
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG
             OPERATING FORCES
       020   MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS......................          19,900                             19,900
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................          19,900                             19,900
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG.........          19,900                             19,900
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF...........................           9,900                              9,900
       030   SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND/OPERATING FORCES.....       2,345,835          79,000          2,424,835
                 Classified adjustment.......................                         [64,000]
                 Global Inform and Influence Activities                               [15,000]
                 Increase....................................
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................       2,355,735          79,000          2,434,735
 
             ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES
       090   DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY...................          18,474                             18,474
       120   DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY..............          29,579                             29,579
       140   DEFENSE LEGAL SERVICES AGENCY...................         110,000                            110,000
       160   DEFENSE MEDIA ACTIVITY..........................           5,960                              5,960
       190   DEFENSE SECURITY COOPERATION AGENCY.............       1,677,000                          1,677,000
       260   DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE EDUCATION ACTIVITY........          73,000                             73,000
       300   OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE..............         106,709         215,000            321,709
                 U.S. Special Operations Command inform and                           [15,000]
                 influence activities........................
                 Ukraine Train & Equip.......................                        [200,000]
       320   WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES................           2,102                              2,102
       330   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.............................       1,427,074                          1,427,074
                 SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE            3,449,898         215,000          3,664,898
                 ACTIVITIES..................................
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE       5,805,633         294,000          6,099,633
 
             COUNTERTERRORISM PARTNERSHIPS FUND
             COUNTERTERRORISM PARTNERSHIPS FUND
       090   COUNTERTERRORISM PARTNERSHIPS FUND..............       2,100,000      -2,100,000                  0
                 Program decrease............................                     [-2,100,000]
                 SUBTOTAL COUNTERTERRORISM PARTNERSHIPS FUND.       2,100,000      -2,100,000                  0
 
                  TOTAL COUNTERTERRORISM PARTNERSHIPS FUND...       2,100,000      -2,100,000                  0
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE..............      39,738,283        -756,757         38,981,526
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SEC. 4303. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS FOR BASE REQUIREMENTS.
 


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 SEC. 4303. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS FOR BASE REQUIREMENTS   (In Thousands
                                                   of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   FY 2016                            House
    Line                           Item                            Request      House  Change      Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY
             OPERATING FORCES
       020   MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES........................          68,873                             68,873
       030   ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE..........................         508,008                            508,008
       040   THEATER LEVEL ASSETS............................         763,300                            763,300
       050   LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT..................       1,054,322                          1,054,322
       080   LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS...................         438,909                            438,909
       120   MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS.........         421,269                            421,269
       130   COMBATANT COMMANDERS CORE OPERATIONS............         164,743                            164,743
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................       3,419,424                          3,419,424
 
             MOBILIZATION
       180   STRATEGIC MOBILITY..............................         401,638                            401,638
       190   ARMY PREPOSITIONED STOCKS.......................         261,683                            261,683
       200   INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS.........................           6,532                              6,532
                 SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION.......................         669,853                            669,853
 
             TRAINING AND RECRUITING
       210   OFFICER ACQUISITION.............................         131,536                            131,536
       220   RECRUIT TRAINING................................          47,843                             47,843
       230   ONE STATION UNIT TRAINING.......................          42,565                             42,565
       240   SENIOR RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS..........         490,378                            490,378
       300   EXAMINING.......................................         194,079                            194,079
       310   OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION................         227,951                            227,951
       320   CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING.................         161,048                            161,048
                 SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING............       1,295,400                          1,295,400
 
             ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES
       350   SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION......................         485,778                            485,778
       360   CENTRAL SUPPLY ACTIVITIES.......................         813,881                            813,881
       380   AMMUNITION MANAGEMENT...........................         322,127                            322,127
       400   SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS......................       1,781,350                          1,781,350
       410   MANPOWER MANAGEMENT.............................         292,532                            292,532
       420   OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT.........................         375,122                            375,122
       440   ARMY CLAIMS ACTIVITIES..........................         225,358                            225,358
       450   REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT..........................         239,755                            239,755
       460   FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND AUDIT READINESS........         223,319                            223,319
       470   INTERNATIONAL MILITARY HEADQUARTERS.............         469,865                            469,865
       480   MISC. SUPPORT OF OTHER NATIONS..................          40,521                             40,521
       530   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.............................         630,606                            630,606
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES.........       5,900,214                          5,900,214
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY........      11,284,891                         11,284,891
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES
             OPERATING FORCES
       020   MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES........................          16,612                             16,612
       030   ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE..........................         486,531                            486,531
       040   THEATER LEVEL ASSETS............................         105,446                            105,446
       050   LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT..................         516,791                            516,791
       070   FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..............         348,601                            348,601
       080   LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS...................          81,350                             81,350
       120   MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS.........          40,962                             40,962
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................       1,596,293                          1,596,293
 
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       130   SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION......................          10,665                             10,665
       150   SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS......................          14,976                             14,976
       160   MANPOWER MANAGEMENT.............................           8,841                              8,841
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........          34,482                             34,482
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES....       1,630,775                          1,630,775
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG
             OPERATING FORCES
       020   MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES........................         167,324                            167,324
       030   ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE..........................         741,327                            741,327
       040   THEATER LEVEL ASSETS............................          88,775                             88,775
       050   LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT..................          32,130                             32,130
       070   FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..............         703,137                            703,137
       080   LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS...................          84,066                             84,066
       120   MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS.........         954,574                            954,574
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................       2,771,333                          2,771,333
 
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       130   SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION......................           6,570                              6,570
       150   SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS......................          68,452                             68,452
       160   MANPOWER MANAGEMENT.............................           8,841                              8,841
       170   OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT.........................         283,670                            283,670
       180   REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT..........................           2,942                              2,942
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........         370,475                            370,475
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG........       3,141,808                          3,141,808
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY
             OPERATING FORCES
       030   AVIATION TECHNICAL DATA & ENGINEERING SERVICES..          37,225                             37,225
       070   AIRCRAFT DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT...............          33,201                             33,201
       100   SHIP OPERATIONS SUPPORT & TRAINING..............         787,446                            787,446
       130   COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS...........................         704,415                            704,415
       140   ELECTRONIC WARFARE..............................          96,916                             96,916
       150   SPACE SYSTEMS AND SURVEILLANCE..................         192,198                            192,198
       160   WARFARE TACTICS.................................         453,942                            453,942
       170   OPERATIONAL METEOROLOGY AND OCEANOGRAPHY........         351,871                            351,871
       180   COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES...........................       1,186,847                          1,186,847
       190   EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE...........................         123,948                            123,948
       210   COMBATANT COMMANDERS CORE OPERATIONS............          98,914                             98,914
       250   IN-SERVICE WEAPONS SYSTEMS SUPPORT..............         141,664                            141,664
       270   OTHER WEAPON SYSTEMS SUPPORT....................         371,872                            371,872
       280   ENTERPRISE INFORMATION..........................         896,061                            896,061
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................       5,476,520                          5,476,520
 
             MOBILIZATION
       310   SHIP PREPOSITIONING AND SURGE...................         422,846                            422,846
       340   EXPEDITIONARY HEALTH SERVICES SYSTEMS...........          69,530                             69,530
       350   INDUSTRIAL READINESS............................           2,237                              2,237
       360   COAST GUARD SUPPORT.............................          21,823                             21,823
                 SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION.......................         516,436                            516,436
 
             TRAINING AND RECRUITING
       370   OFFICER ACQUISITION.............................         149,375                            149,375
       390   RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS.................         156,290                            156,290
       400   SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING......................         653,728                            653,728
       430   TRAINING SUPPORT................................         196,048                            196,048
       450   OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION................         137,855                            137,855
       460   CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING.................          77,257                             77,257
                 SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING............       1,370,553                          1,370,553
 
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       500   CIVILIAN MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT......         120,812                            120,812
       510   MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT......         350,983                            350,983
       530   SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS......................         335,482                            335,482
       550   SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION......................         197,724                            197,724
       570   PLANNING, ENGINEERING AND DESIGN................         274,936                            274,936
       580   ACQUISITION AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT..............       1,122,178                          1,122,178
       680   INTERNATIONAL HEADQUARTERS AND AGENCIES.........           4,768                              4,768
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........       2,406,883                          2,406,883
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY........       9,770,392                          9,770,392
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS
             OPERATING FORCES
       020   FIELD LOGISTICS.................................         931,757                            931,757
       040   MARITIME PREPOSITIONING.........................          86,259                             86,259
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................       1,018,016                          1,018,016
 
             TRAINING AND RECRUITING
       070   RECRUIT TRAINING................................          16,460                             16,460
       080   OFFICER ACQUISITION.............................             977                                977
       090   SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING......................          97,325                             97,325
       110   TRAINING SUPPORT................................         347,476                            347,476
       130   OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION................          39,963                             39,963
                 SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING............         502,201                            502,201
 
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       150   SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION......................          37,386                             37,386
       180   ACQUISITION AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT..............          76,105                             76,105
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........         113,491                            113,491
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS       1,633,708                          1,633,708
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES
             OPERATING FORCES
       090   COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS...........................          14,499                             14,499
       100   COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES...........................         117,601                            117,601
       120   ENTERPRISE INFORMATION..........................          29,382                             29,382
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................         161,482                            161,482
 
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       160   MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT......          13,782                             13,782
       170   SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS......................           3,437                              3,437
       180   ACQUISITION AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT..............           3,210                              3,210
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........          20,429                             20,429
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES....         181,911                            181,911
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       050   SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION......................             924                                924
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........             924                                924
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE..             924                                924
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE
             OPERATING FORCES
       100   LAUNCH FACILITIES...............................         271,177                            271,177
       110   SPACE CONTROL SYSTEMS...........................         382,824                            382,824
       130   COMBATANT COMMANDERS CORE OPERATIONS............         205,078                            205,078
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................         859,079                            859,079
 
             MOBILIZATION
       140   AIRLIFT OPERATIONS..............................       2,229,196                          2,229,196
       150   MOBILIZATION PREPAREDNESS.......................         148,318                            148,318
                 SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION.......................       2,377,514                          2,377,514
 
             TRAINING AND RECRUITING
       190   OFFICER ACQUISITION.............................          92,191                             92,191
       200   RECRUIT TRAINING................................          21,871                             21,871
       210   RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS (ROTC)..........          77,527                             77,527
       270   TRAINING SUPPORT................................          76,464                             76,464
       300   EXAMINING.......................................           3,803                              3,803
       310   OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION................         180,807                            180,807
       320   CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING.................         167,478                            167,478
                 SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING............         620,141                            620,141
 
             ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
       350   TECHNICAL SUPPORT ACTIVITIES....................         862,022                            862,022
       400   SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS......................         498,053                            498,053
       410   OTHER SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES....................         900,253                            900,253
       450   INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT...........................          89,148                             89,148
       460   CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.............................         668,233                            668,233
                 SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...........       3,017,709                          3,017,709
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE...       6,874,443                          6,874,443
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE
             OPERATING FORCES
       020   MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS......................         226,243                            226,243
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................         226,243                            226,243
 
             ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES
       080   MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERS MGMT (ARPC)..........          13,665                             13,665
       090   OTHER PERS SUPPORT (DISABILITY COMP)............           6,606                              6,606
                 SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE               20,271                             20,271
                 ACTIVITIES..................................
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE..         246,514                            246,514
 
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE
             OPERATING FORCES
       010   JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF...........................         485,888                            485,888
                 SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...................         485,888                            485,888
 
             TRAINING AND RECRUITING
       040   DEFENSE ACQUISITION UNIVERSITY..................         142,659                            142,659
       050   NATIONAL DEFENSE UNIVERSITY.....................          78,416                             78,416
                 SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING............         221,075                            221,075
 
             ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES
       090   DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY...................         570,177                            570,177
       140   DEFENSE LEGAL SERVICES AGENCY...................          26,073                             26,073
       180   DEFENSE PERSONNEL ACCOUNTING AGENCY.............         115,372                            115,372
       200   DEFENSE SECURITY SERVICE........................         508,396                            508,396
       230   DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY SECURITY ADMINISTRATION......          33,577                             33,577
                 SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE            1,253,595                          1,253,595
                 ACTIVITIES..................................
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE       1,960,558                          1,960,558
 
             MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
             MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
       010   US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES,                 14,078                             14,078
              DEFENSE........................................
       030   COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION....................         358,496                            358,496
       040   ACQ WORKFORCE DEV FD............................          84,140                             84,140
       050   ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY.................         234,829                            234,829
       060   ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY.................         292,453                            292,453
       070   ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE............         368,131                            368,131
       080   ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE..............           8,232                              8,232
       090   ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION FORMERLY USED SITES...         203,717                            203,717
                 SUBTOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.......       1,564,076                          1,564,076
 
                  TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS.........       1,564,076                          1,564,076
 
                  TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE..............      38,290,000                         38,290,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL
 


SEC. 4401. MILITARY PERSONNEL.
 


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             SEC. 4401. MILITARY PERSONNEL (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Item                           FY 2016  Request      House  Change     House  Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military Personnel Appropriations...................        130,491,227            -291,492         130,199,735
     A-10 restoration: Military Personnel...........                               [132,069]
     Basic Housing Allowance........................                               [400,000]
     EC-130H Force Structure Restoration............                                [19,639]
     Financial Literacy Training....................                                [85,000]
     Foreign Currency adjustments...................                              [-480,500]
     National Guard State Partnership Program                                        [5,000]
     increase.......................................
     Prohibition on Per Diem Allowance Reduction....                                [12,000]
     Reversing the disestablishment of HSC-84 and                                   [30,700]
     HSC-85.........................................
     Unobligated balances...........................                              [-495,400]
Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Fund Contributions.          6,243,449                               6,243,449
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SEC. 4402. MILITARY PERSONNEL FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
 


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           SEC. 4402. MILITARY PERSONNEL FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Item                           FY 2016  Request      House  Change     House  Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military Personnel Appropriations...................          3,204,758                               3,204,758
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
 


SEC. 4501. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.
 


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            SEC. 4501. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Item                           FY 2016  Request      House  Change     House  Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY
INDUSTRIAL OPERATIONS
SUPPLY MANAGEMENT--ARMY.............................             50,432               5,000              55,432
     Pilot program for Continuous Technology                                         [5,000]
     Refreshment....................................
       TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY.............             50,432               5,000              55,432
 
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, NAVY
SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS..............................                                  5,000               5,000
     Pilot program for Continuous Technology                                         [5,000]
     Refreshment....................................
       TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, NAVY.............                                  5,000               5,000
 
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE
SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS..............................             62,898               5,000              67,898
     Pilot program for Continuous Technology                                         [5,000]
     Refreshment....................................
TRANSPORTATION OF FALLEN HEROES
       TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE........             62,898               5,000              67,898
 
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE
ENERGY MANAGEMENT--DEF
SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT--DEF
DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY (DLA)......................             45,084                                  45,084
       TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE.....             45,084                                  45,084
 
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA
COMMISSARY RESALE STOCKS
COMMISSARY OPERATIONS...............................          1,154,154             322,000           1,476,154
     Restoration of Proposed Efficiencies...........                               [183,000]
     Restoration of Savings from Legislative                                       [139,000]
     Proposals......................................
       TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA.............          1,154,154             322,000           1,476,154
 
NATIONAL DEFENSE SEALIFT FUND
LMSR
T-AKE
MPF MLP
POST DELIVERY AND OUTFITTING........................             15,456             674,190             689,646
     Transfer from SCN--TAO(X)......................                               [674,190]
NATIONAL DEF SEALIFT VESSEL
LG MED SPD RO/RO MAINTENANCE........................            124,493                                 124,493
DOD MOBILIZATION ALTERATIONS........................              8,243                                   8,243
TAH MAINTENANCE.....................................             27,784                                  27,784
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT............................             25,197                                  25,197
READY RESERVE FORCE.................................            272,991                                 272,991
       TOTAL NATIONAL DEFENSE SEALIFT FUND..........            474,164             674,190           1,148,354
 
NATIONAL SEA-BASED DETERRENCE FUND
DEVELOPMENT.........................................                                971,393             971,393
     Transfer from RDTE, Navy, line 050.............                               [971,393]
PROPULSION..........................................                                419,300             419,300
     Transfer from RDTE, Navy, line 045.............                               [419,300]
       TOTAL NATIONAL SEA-BASED DETERRENCE FUND.....                              1,390,693           1,390,693
 
CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE.............................            139,098                                 139,098
RDT&E...............................................            579,342                                 579,342
PROCUREMENT.........................................              2,281                                   2,281
       TOTAL CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION....            720,721                                 720,721
 
DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEF
DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES,                  739,009              50,000             789,009
 DEFENSE............................................
     Plan Central America...........................                                [50,000]
DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM.......................            111,589                                 111,589
NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM
       TOTAL DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG                       850,598              50,000             900,598
       ACTIVITIES, DEF..............................
 
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE...........................            310,459                                 310,459
RDT&E...............................................              4,700                                   4,700
PROCUREMENT.........................................              1,000              -1,000                   0
     Program decrease...............................                                [-1,000]
       TOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL........            316,159              -1,000             315,159
 
DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM
IN-HOUSE CARE.......................................          9,082,298                               9,082,298
PRIVATE SECTOR CARE.................................         14,892,683                              14,892,683
CONSOLIDATED HEALTH SUPPORT.........................          2,415,658                               2,415,658
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT..............................          1,677,827                               1,677,827
MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES...............................            327,967                                 327,967
EDUCATION AND TRAINING..............................            750,614                                 750,614
BASE OPERATIONS/COMMUNICATIONS......................          1,742,893                               1,742,893
RESEARCH............................................             10,996                                  10,996
EXPLORATRY DEVELOPMENT..............................             59,473                                  59,473
ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT................................            231,356                                 231,356
DEMONSTRATION/VALIDATION............................            103,443                                 103,443
ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT.............................            515,910                                 515,910
MANAGEMENT AND SUPPORT..............................             41,567                                  41,567
CAPABILITIES ENHANCEMENT............................             17,356                                  17,356
INITIAL OUTFITTING..................................             33,392                                  33,392
REPLACEMENT & MODERNIZATION.........................            330,504                                 330,504
THEATER MEDICAL INFORMATION PROGRAM.................              1,494                                   1,494
IEHR................................................              7,897                                   7,897
UNDISTRIBUTED.......................................                               -508,000            -508,000
     Foreign Currency adjustments...................                               [-54,700]
     Unobligated balances...........................                              [-453,300]
       TOTAL DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM.................         32,243,328            -508,000          31,735,328
 
       TOTAL OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS...................         35,917,538           1,942,883          37,860,421
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SEC. 4502. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
 


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          SEC. 4502. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Item                           FY 2016  Request      House  Change     House  Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE
SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS
TRANSPORTATION OF FALLEN HEROES.....................              2,500                                   2,500
       TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE........              2,500                                   2,500
 
WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE
SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT--DEF
DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY (DLA)......................             86,350                                  86,350
       TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE.....             86,350                                  86,350
 
DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEF
DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES,                  186,000                                 186,000
 DEFENSE............................................
       TOTAL DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG                       186,000                                 186,000
       ACTIVITIES, DEF..............................
 
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE...........................             10,262                                  10,262
       TOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL........             10,262                                  10,262
 
DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM
IN-HOUSE CARE.......................................             65,149                                  65,149
PRIVATE SECTOR CARE.................................            192,210                                 192,210
CONSOLIDATED HEALTH SUPPORT.........................              9,460                                   9,460
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES
EDUCATION AND TRAINING..............................              5,885                                   5,885
       TOTAL DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM.................            272,704                                 272,704
 
       TOTAL OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS...................            557,816                                 557,816
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
 


SEC. 4601. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION.
 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               SEC. 4601. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION (In Thousands of Dollars)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                   FY 2016                      House
        Account                    State/ Country                  Installation             Project Title          Request    House Change    Agreement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army                     ALASKA                              Fort Greely               PHYSICAL READINESS              7,800                       7,800
                                                                                        TRAINING FACILITY.
Army                     CALIFORNIA                          Concord                   PIER...................        98,000                      98,000
Army                     COLORADO                            Fort Carson               ROTARY WING TAXIWAY....         5,800                       5,800
Army                     GEORGIA                             Fort Gordon               COMMAND AND CONTROL            90,000                      90,000
                                                                                        FACILITY.
Army                     GERMANY                             Grafenwoehr               VEHICLE MAINTENANCE            51,000                      51,000
                                                                                        SHOP.
Army                     NEW YORK                            Fort Drum                 NCO ACADEMY COMPLEX....        19,000                      19,000
Army                     NEW YORK                            U.S. Military Academy     WASTE WATER TREATMENT          70,000                      70,000
                                                                                        PLANT.
Army                     OKLAHOMA                            Fort Sill                 RECEPTION BARRACKS             56,000                      56,000
                                                                                        COMPLEX PH2.
Army                     OKLAHOMA                            Fort Sill                 TRAINING SUPPORT               13,400                      13,400
                                                                                        FACILITY.
Army                     TEXAS                               Corpus Christi            POWERTRAIN FACILITY            85,000                      85,000
                                                                                        (INFRASTRUCTURE/METAL).
Army                     TEXAS                               Joint Base San Antonio    HOMELAND DEFENSE               43,000       -43,000             0
                                                                                        OPERATIONS CENTER.
Army                     VIRGINIA                            Fort Lee                  TRAINING SUPPORT               33,000                      33,000
                                                                                        FACILITY.
Army                     VIRGINIA                            Joint Base Myer-          INSTRUCTION BUILDING...        37,000       -37,000             0
                                                              Henderson
Army                     WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     HOST NATION SUPPORT....        36,000                      36,000
                                                              Locations
Army                     WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MINOR CONSTRUCTION.....        25,000                      25,000
                                                              Locations
Army                     WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     PLANNING AND DESIGN....        73,245                      73,245
                                                              Locations
      Military Construction, Army Total                                                                              743,245       -80,000       663,245
                         ..................................  ........................
Navy                     ARIZONA                             Yuma                      AIRCRAFT MAINT.                50,635                      50,635
                                                                                        FACILITIES & APRON
                                                                                        (SO. CALA).
Navy                     BAHRAIN ISLAND                      SW Asia                   MINA SALMAN PIER               37,700       -37,700             0
                                                                                        REPLACEMENT.
Navy                     BAHRAIN ISLAND                      SW Asia                   SHIP MAINTENANCE               52,091       -52,091             0
                                                                                        SUPPORT FACILITY.
Navy                     CALIFORNIA                          Camp Pendleton            RAW WATER PIPELINE             44,540                      44,540
                                                                                        PENDLETON TO FALLBROOK.
Navy                     CALIFORNIA                          Coronado                  COASTAL CAMPUS                  4,856                       4,856
                                                                                        UTILITIES.
Navy                     CALIFORNIA                          Lemoore                   F-35C HANGAR                   56,497                      56,497
                                                                                        MODERNIZATION AND
                                                                                        ADDITION.
Navy                     CALIFORNIA                          Lemoore                   F-35C TRAINING                  8,187                       8,187
                                                                                        FACILITIES.
Navy                     CALIFORNIA                          Lemoore                   RTO AND MISSION DEBRIEF         7,146                       7,146
                                                                                        FACILITY.
Navy                     CALIFORNIA                          Point Mugu                E-2C/D HANGAR ADDITIONS        19,453                      19,453
                                                                                        AND RENOVATIONS.
Navy                     CALIFORNIA                          Point Mugu                TRITON AVIONICS AND             2,974                       2,974
                                                                                        FUEL SYSTEMS TRAINER.
Navy                     CALIFORNIA                          San Diego                 LCS SUPPORT FACILITY...        37,366                      37,366
Navy                     CALIFORNIA                          Twentynine Palms          MICROGRID EXPANSION....         9,160                       9,160
Navy                     FLORIDA                             Jacksonville              FLEET SUPPORT FACILITY          8,455                       8,455
                                                                                        ADDITION.
Navy                     FLORIDA                             Jacksonville              TRITON MISSION CONTROL          8,296                       8,296
                                                                                        FACILITY.
Navy                     FLORIDA                             Mayport                   LCS MISSION MODULE             16,159                      16,159
                                                                                        READINESS CENTER.
Navy                     FLORIDA                             Pensacola                 A-SCHOOL UNACCOPANIED          18,347                      18,347
                                                                                        HOUSING (CORRY
                                                                                        STATION).
Navy                     FLORIDA                             Whiting Field             T-6B JPATS TRAINING            10,421                      10,421
                                                                                        OPERATIONS FACILITY.
Navy                     GEORGIA                             Albany                    GROUND SOURCE HEAT              7,851                       7,851
                                                                                        PUMPS.
Navy                     GEORGIA                             Kings Bay                 INDUSTRIAL CONTROL              8,099                       8,099
                                                                                        SYSTEM INFRASTRUCTURE.
Navy                     GEORGIA                             Townsend                  TOWNSEND BOMBING RANGE         48,279                      48,279
                                                                                        EXPANSION PHASE 2.
Navy                     GUAM                                Joint Region Marianas     LIVE-FIRE TRAINING            125,677                     125,677
                                                                                        RANGE COMPLEX (NW
                                                                                        FIELD).
Navy                     GUAM                                Joint Region Marianas     MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE          10,777                      10,777
                                                                                        LANDFILL CLOSURE.
Navy                     GUAM                                Joint Region Marianas     SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM          45,314                      45,314
                                                                                        RECAPITALIZATION.
Navy                     HAWAII                              Barking Sands             PMRF POWER GRID                30,623                      30,623
                                                                                        CONSOLIDATION.
Navy                     HAWAII                              Joint Base Pearl Harbor-  UEM INTERCONNECT STA C          6,335                       6,335
                                                              Hickam                    TO HICKAM.
Navy                     HAWAII                              Joint Base Pearl Harbor-  WELDING SCHOOL SHOP             8,546                       8,546
                                                              Hickam                    CONSOLIDATION.
Navy                     HAWAII                              Kaneohe Bay               AIRFIELD LIGHTING              26,097                      26,097
                                                                                        MODERNIZATION.
Navy                     HAWAII                              Kaneohe Bay               BACHELOR ENLISTED              68,092                      68,092
                                                                                        QUARTERS.
Navy                     HAWAII                              Kaneohe Bay               P-8A DETACHMENT SUPPORT        12,429                      12,429
                                                                                        FACILITIES.
Navy                     ITALY                               Sigonella                 P-8A HANGAR AND FLEET          62,302       -62,302             0
                                                                                        SUPPORT FACILITY.
Navy                     ITALY                               Sigonella                 TRITON HANGAR AND              40,641       -40,641             0
                                                                                        OPERATION FACILITY.
Navy                     JAPAN                               Camp Butler               MILITARY WORKING DOG           11,697                      11,697
                                                                                        FACILITIES (CAMP
                                                                                        HANSEN).
Navy                     JAPAN                               Iwakuni                   E-2D OPERATIONAL                8,716                       8,716
                                                                                        TRAINER COMPLEX.
Navy                     JAPAN                               Iwakuni                   SECURITY MODIFICATIONS--        9,207                       9,207
                                                                                        CVW5/MAG12 HQ.
Navy                     JAPAN                               Kadena AB                 AIRCRAFT MAINT.                23,310                      23,310
                                                                                        SHELTERS & APRON.
Navy                     JAPAN                               Yokosuka                  CHILD DEVELOPMENT              13,846                      13,846
                                                                                        CENTER.
Navy                     MARYLAND                            Patuxent River            UNACCOMPANIED HOUSING..        40,935                      40,935
Navy                     NORTH CAROLINA                      Camp Lejeune              2ND RADIO BN COMPLEX                0                           0
                                                                                        OPERATIONS
                                                                                        CONSOLIDATION.
Navy                     NORTH CAROLINA                      Camp Lejeune              SIMULATOR INTEGRATION/         54,849                      54,849
                                                                                        RANGE CONTROL FACILITY.
Navy                     NORTH CAROLINA                      Cherry Point Marine       KC130J ENLSITED AIR             4,769                       4,769
                                                              Corps Air Station         CREW TRAINER FACILITY.
Navy                     NORTH CAROLINA                      Cherry Point Marine       UNMANNED AIRCRAFT              29,657                      29,657
                                                              Corps Air Station         SYSTEM FACILITIES.
Navy                     NORTH CAROLINA                      New River                 OPERATIONAL TRAINER             3,312                       3,312
                                                                                        FACILITY.
Navy                     NORTH CAROLINA                      New River                 RADAR AIR TRAFFIC               4,918                       4,918
                                                                                        CONTROL FACILITY
                                                                                        ADDITION.
Navy                     POLAND                              RedziKowo Base            AEGIS ASHORE MISSILE           51,270       -51,270             0
                                                                                        DEFENSE COMPLEX.
Navy                     SOUTH CAROLINA                      Parris Island             RANGE SAFETY                   27,075                      27,075
                                                                                        IMPROVEMENTS &
                                                                                        MODERNIZATION.
Navy                     VIRGINIA                            Dam Neck                  MARITIME SURVEILLANCE          23,066                      23,066
                                                                                        SYSTEM FACILITY.
Navy                     VIRGINIA                            Norfolk                   COMMUNICATIONS CENTER..        75,289                      75,289
Navy                     VIRGINIA                            Norfolk                   ELECTRICAL REPAIRS TO          44,254                      44,254
                                                                                        PIERS 2,6,7, AND 11.
Navy                     VIRGINIA                            Norfolk                   MH60 HELICOPTER                 7,134                       7,134
                                                                                        TRAINING FACILITY.
Navy                     VIRGINIA                            Portsmouth                WATERFRONT UTILITIES...        45,513                      45,513
Navy                     VIRGINIA                            Quantico                  ATFP GATE..............         5,840                       5,840
Navy                     VIRGINIA                            Quantico                  ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION         8,418                       8,418
                                                                                        UPGRADE.
Navy                     VIRGINIA                            Quantico                  EMBASSY SECURITY GUARD         43,941                      43,941
                                                                                        BEQ & OPS FACILITY.
Navy                     WASHINGTON                          Bangor                    REGIONAL SHIP                       0                           0
                                                                                        MAINTENANCE SUPPORT
                                                                                        FACILITY.
Navy                     WASHINGTON                          Bangor                    WRA LAND/WATER                 34,177                      34,177
                                                                                        INTERFACE.
Navy                     WASHINGTON                          Bremerton                 DRY DOCK 6                     22,680                      22,680
                                                                                        MODERNIZATION &
                                                                                        UTILITY IMPROVE..
Navy                     WASHINGTON                          Indian Island             SHORE POWER TO                  4,472                       4,472
                                                                                        AMMUNITION PIER.
Navy                     WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MCON DESIGN FUNDS......        91,649                      91,649
                                                              Locations
Navy                     WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     UNSPECIFIED MINOR              22,590                      22,590
                                                              Locations                 CONSTRUCTION.
      Military Construction, Navy Total                                                                            1,605,929      -244,004     1,361,925
                         ..................................  ........................
AF                       ALASKA                              Eielson AFB               F-35A FLIGHT SIM/ALTER         37,000                      37,000
                                                                                        SQUAD OPS/AMU FACILITY.
AF                       ALASKA                              Eielson AFB               RPR CENTRAL HEAT &             34,400                      34,400
                                                                                        POWER PLANT BOILER PH3.
AF                       ARIZONA                             Davis-Monthan AFB         HC-130J AGE COVERED             4,700                       4,700
                                                                                        STORAGE.
AF                       ARIZONA                             Davis-Monthan AFB         HC-130J WASH RACK......        12,200                      12,200
AF                       ARIZONA                             Luke AFB                  F-35A ADAL FUEL OFFLOAD         5,000                       5,000
                                                                                        FACILITY.
AF                       ARIZONA                             Luke AFB                  F-35A AIRCRAFT                 13,200                      13,200
                                                                                        MAINTENANCE HANGAR/SQ
                                                                                        3.
AF                       ARIZONA                             Luke AFB                  F-35A BOMB BUILD-UP             5,500                       5,500
                                                                                        FACILITY.
AF                       ARIZONA                             Luke AFB                  F-35A SQ OPS/AMU/HANGAR/       33,000                      33,000
                                                                                        SQ 4.
AF                       COLORADO                            U.S. Air Force Academy    FRONT GATES FORCE              10,000                      10,000
                                                                                        PROTECTION
                                                                                        ENHANCEMENTS.
AF                       FLORIDA                             Cape Canaveral Afs        RANGE COMMUNICATIONS           21,000                      21,000
                                                                                        FACILITY.
AF                       FLORIDA                             Eglin AFB                 F-35A CONSOLIDATED HQ           8,700                       8,700
                                                                                        FACILITY.
AF                       FLORIDA                             Hurlburt Field            ADAL 39 INFORMATION            14,200                      14,200
                                                                                        OPERATIONS SQUAD
                                                                                        FACILITY.
AF                       GREENLAND                           Thule AB                  THULE CONSOLIDATION PH         41,965                      41,965
                                                                                        1.
AF                       GUAM                                Joint Region Marianas     APR--DISPERSED MAINT           19,000                      19,000
                                                                                        SPARES & SE STORAGE
                                                                                        FAC.
AF                       GUAM                                Joint Region Marianas     APR--INSTALLATION              22,200                      22,200
                                                                                        CONTROL CENTER.
AF                       GUAM                                Joint Region Marianas     APR--SOUTH RAMP                 7,100                       7,100
                                                                                        UTILITIES PHASE 2.
AF                       GUAM                                Joint Region Marianas     PAR--LO/CORROSION CNTRL/            0                           0
                                                                                        COMPOSITE REPAIR.
AF                       GUAM                                Joint Region Marianas     PRTC ROADS.............         2,500                       2,500
AF                       HAWAII                              Joint Base Pearl Harbor-  F-22 FIGHTER ALERT             46,000                      46,000
                                                              Hickam                    FACILITY.
AF                       JAPAN                               Yokota AB                 C-130J FLIGHT SIMULATOR         8,461                       8,461
                                                                                        FACILITY.
AF                       KANSAS                              Mcconnell AFB             KC-46A ADAL DEICING             4,300                       4,300
                                                                                        PADS.
AF                       MARYLAND                            Fort Meade                CYBERCOM JOINT                 86,000                      86,000
                                                                                        OPERATIONS CENTER,
                                                                                        INCREMENT 3.
AF                       MISSOURI                            Whiteman AFB              CONSOLIDATED STEALTH           29,500                      29,500
                                                                                        OPS & NUCLEAR ALERT
                                                                                        FAC.
AF                       MONTANA                             Malmstrom AFB             TACTICAL RESPONSE FORCE        19,700                      19,700
                                                                                        ALERT FACILITY.
AF                       NEBRASKA                            Offutt AFB                DORMITORY (144 RM).....        21,000                      21,000
AF                       NEVADA                              Nellis AFB                F-35A AIRFIELD                 31,000                      31,000
                                                                                        PAVEMENTS.
AF                       NEVADA                              Nellis AFB                F-35A LIVE ORDNANCE            34,500                      34,500
                                                                                        LOADING AREA.
AF                       NEVADA                              Nellis AFB                F-35A MUNITIONS                 3,450                       3,450
                                                                                        MAINTENANCE FACILITIES.
AF                       NEW MEXICO                          Cannon AFB                CONSTRUCT AT/FP GATE--          7,800                       7,800
                                                                                        PORTALES.
AF                       NEW MEXICO                          Holloman AFB              MARSHALLING AREA ARM/DE-        3,000                       3,000
                                                                                        ARM PAD D.
AF                       NEW MEXICO                          Kirtland AFB              SPACE VEHICLES                 12,800                      12,800
                                                                                        COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT
                                                                                        LAB.
AF                       NIGER                               Agadez                    CONSTRUCT AIRFIELD AND         50,000       -50,000             0
                                                                                        BASE CAMP.
AF                       NORTH CAROLINA                      Seymour Johnson AFB       AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL            17,100                      17,100
                                                                                        TOWER/BASE OPS
                                                                                        FACILITY.
AF                       OKLAHOMA                            Altus AFB                 DORMITORY (120 RM).....        18,000                      18,000
AF                       OKLAHOMA                            Altus AFB                 KC-46A FTU ADAL FUEL           10,400                      10,400
                                                                                        CELL MAINT HANGAR.
AF                       OKLAHOMA                            Tinker AFB                AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL            12,900                      12,900
                                                                                        TOWER.
AF                       OKLAHOMA                            Tinker AFB                KC-46A DEPOT                   37,000                      37,000
                                                                                        MAINTENANCE DOCK.
AF                       OMAN                                Al Musannah AB            AIRLIFT APRON..........        25,000       -25,000             0
AF                       SOUTH DAKOTA                        Ellsworth AFB             DORMITORY (168 RM).....        23,000                      23,000
AF                       TEXAS                               Joint Base San Antonio    BMT CLASSROOMS/DINING          35,000                      35,000
                                                                                        FACILITY 3.
AF                       TEXAS                               Joint Base San Antonio    BMT RECRUIT DORMITORY 5        71,000                      71,000
AF                       UNITED KINGDOM                      Croughton RAF             CONSOLIDATED SATCOM/           36,424                      36,424
                                                                                        TECH CONTROL FACILITY.
AF                       UNITED KINGDOM                      Croughton RAF             JIAC CONSOLIDATION--PH         94,191                      94,191
                                                                                        2.
AF                       UTAH                                Hill AFB                  F-35A FLIGHT SIMULATOR          5,900                       5,900
                                                                                        ADDITION PHASE 2.
AF                       UTAH                                Hill AFB                  F-35A HANGAR 40/42             21,000                      21,000
                                                                                        ADDITIONS AND AMU.
AF                       UTAH                                Hill AFB                  HAYMAN IGLOOS..........        11,500                      11,500
AF                       WORLDWIDE CLASSIFIED                Classified Location       LONG RANGE STRIKE              77,130             0        77,130
                                                                                        BOMBER.
AF                       WORLDWIDE CLASSIFIED                Classified Location       MUNITIONS STORAGE......         3,000                       3,000
AF                       WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Various Worldwide         PLANNING AND DESIGN....        89,164                      89,164
                                                              Locations
AF                       WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Various Worldwide         UNSPECIFIED MINOR              22,900                      22,900
                                                              Locations                 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION.
AF                       WYOMING                             F. E. Warren AFB          WEAPON STORAGE FACILITY        95,000                      95,000
      Military Construction, Air Force Total                                                                       1,354,785       -75,000     1,279,785
                         ..................................  ........................
Def-Wide                 ALABAMA                             Fort Rucker               FORT RUCKER ES/PS              46,787                      46,787
                                                                                        CONSOLIDATION/
                                                                                        REPLACEMENT.
Def-Wide                 ALABAMA                             Maxwell AFB               MAXWELL ES/MS                  32,968                      32,968
                                                                                        REPLACEMENT/RENOVATION.
Def-Wide                 ARIZONA                             Fort Huachuca             JITC BUILDINGS 52101/           3,884                       3,884
                                                                                        52111 RENOVATIONS.
Def-Wide                 CALIFORNIA                          Camp Pendleton            SOF COMBAT SERVICE             10,181                      10,181
                                                                                        SUPPORT FACILITY.
Def-Wide                 CALIFORNIA                          Camp Pendleton            SOF PERFORMANCE                10,371       -10,371             0
                                                                                        RESILIENCY CENTER-WEST.
Def-Wide                 CALIFORNIA                          Coronado                  SOF LOGISTICS SUPPORT          47,218       -47,218             0
                                                                                        UNIT ONE OPS FAC. #2.
Def-Wide                 CALIFORNIA                          Fresno Yosemite IAP ANG   REPLACE FUEL STORAGE           10,700                      10,700
                                                                                        AND DISTRIB.
                                                                                        FACILITIES.
Def-Wide                 COLORADO                            Fort Carson               SOF LANGUAGE TRAINING           8,243                       8,243
                                                                                        FACILITY.
Def-Wide                 CONUS CLASSIFIED                    Classified Location       OPERATIONS SUPPORT             20,065       -20,065             0
                                                                                        FACILITY.
Def-Wide                 DELAWARE                            Dover AFB                 CONSTRUCT HYDRANT FUEL         21,600                      21,600
                                                                                        SYSTEM.
Def-Wide                 DJIBOUTI                            Camp Lemonier             CONSTRUCT FUEL STORAGE         43,700       -43,700             0
                                                                                        & DISTRIB. FACILITIES.
Def-Wide                 FLORIDA                             Hurlburt Field            SOF FUEL CELL                  17,989                      17,989
                                                                                        MAINTENANCE HANGAR.
Def-Wide                 FLORIDA                             Macdill AFB               SOF OPERATIONAL SUPPORT        39,142                      39,142
                                                                                        FACILITY.
Def-Wide                 GEORGIA                             Moody AFB                 REPLACE PUMPHOUSE AND          10,900                      10,900
                                                                                        TRUCK FILLSTANDS.
Def-Wide                 GERMANY                             Garmisch                  GARMISCH E/MS-ADDITION/        14,676                      14,676
                                                                                        MODERNIZATION.
Def-Wide                 GERMANY                             Grafenwoehr               GRAFENWOEHR ELEMENTARY         38,138                      38,138
                                                                                        SCHOOL REPLACEMENT.
Def-Wide                 GERMANY                             Rhine Ordnance Barracks   MEDICAL CENTER                 85,034                      85,034
                                                                                        REPLACEMENT INCR 5.
Def-Wide                 GERMANY                             Spangdahlem AB            CONSTRUCT FUEL PIPELINE         5,500                       5,500
Def-Wide                 GERMANY                             Spangdahlem AB            MEDICAL/DENTAL CLINIC          34,071                      34,071
                                                                                        ADDITION.
Def-Wide                 GERMANY                             Stuttgart-Patch Barracks  PATCH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL        49,413                      49,413
                                                                                        REPLACEMENT.
Def-Wide                 HAWAII                              Kaneohe Bay               MEDICAL/DENTAL CLINIC         122,071       -31,814        90,257
                                                                                        REPLACEMENT.
Def-Wide                 HAWAII                              Schofield Barracks        BEHAVIORAL HEALTH/            123,838       -36,038        87,800
                                                                                        DENTAL CLINIC ADDITION.
Def-Wide                 JAPAN                               Kadena AB                 AIRFIELD PAVEMENTS.....        37,485                      37,485
Def-Wide                 KENTUCKY                            Fort Campbell             SOF COMPANY HQ/                12,553                      12,553
                                                                                        CLASSROOMS.
Def-Wide                 KENTUCKY                            Fort Knox                 FORT KNOX HS RENOVATION/       23,279                      23,279
                                                                                        MS ADDITION.
Def-Wide                 MARYLAND                            Fort Meade                NSAW CAMPUS FEEDERS            33,745                      33,745
                                                                                        PHASE 2.
Def-Wide                 MARYLAND                            Fort Meade                NSAW RECAPITALIZE              34,897                      34,897
                                                                                        BUILDING #2 INCR 1.
Def-Wide                 NEVADA                              Nellis AFB                REPLACE HYDRANT FUEL           39,900                      39,900
                                                                                        SYSTEM.
Def-Wide                 NEW MEXICO                          Cannon AFB                CONSTRUCT PUMPHOUSE AND        20,400                      20,400
                                                                                        FUEL STORAGE.
Def-Wide                 NEW MEXICO                          Cannon AFB                SOF SQUADRON OPERATIONS        11,565                      11,565
                                                                                        FACILITY.
Def-Wide                 NEW MEXICO                          Cannon AFB                SOF ST OPERATIONAL             13,146                      13,146
                                                                                        TRAINING FACILITIES.
Def-Wide                 NEW YORK                            West Point                WEST POINT ELEMENTARY          55,778                      55,778
                                                                                        SCHOOL REPLACEMENT.
Def-Wide                 NORTH CAROLINA                      Camp Lejeune              SOF COMBAT SERVICE             14,036                      14,036
                                                                                        SUPPORT FACILITY.
Def-Wide                 NORTH CAROLINA                      Camp Lejeune              SOF MARINE BATTALION           54,970                      54,970
                                                                                        COMPANY/TEAM
                                                                                        FACILITIES.
Def-Wide                 NORTH CAROLINA                      Fort Bragg                BUTNER ELEMENTARY              32,944                      32,944
                                                                                        SCHOOL REPLACEMENT.
Def-Wide                 NORTH CAROLINA                      Fort Bragg                SOF 21 STS OPERATIONS          16,863        -2,529        14,334
                                                                                        FACILITY.
Def-Wide                 NORTH CAROLINA                      Fort Bragg                SOF BATTALION                  38,549                      38,549
                                                                                        OPERATIONS FACILITY.
Def-Wide                 NORTH CAROLINA                      Fort Bragg                SOF INDOOR RANGE.......         8,303                       8,303
Def-Wide                 NORTH CAROLINA                      Fort Bragg                SOF INTELLIGENCE               28,265                      28,265
                                                                                        TRAINING CENTER.
Def-Wide                 NORTH CAROLINA                      Fort Bragg                SOF SPECIAL TACTICS            43,887                      43,887
                                                                                        FACILITY (PH 2).
Def-Wide                 OHIO                                Wright-Patterson AFB      SATELLITE PHARMACY              6,623                       6,623
                                                                                        REPLACEMENT.
Def-Wide                 OREGON                              Klamath Falls IAP         REPLACE FUEL FACILITIES         2,500                       2,500
Def-Wide                 PENNSYLVANIA                        Philadelphia              REPLACE HEADQUARTERS...        49,700                      49,700
Def-Wide                 POLAND                              RedziKowo Base            AEGIS ASHORE MISSILE          169,153      -169,153             0
                                                                                        DEFENSE SYSTEM COMPLEX.
Def-Wide                 SOUTH CAROLINA                      Fort Jackson              PIERCE TERRACE                 26,157                      26,157
                                                                                        ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
                                                                                        REPLACEMENT.
Def-Wide                 SPAIN                               Rota                      ROTA ES AND HS                 13,737                      13,737
                                                                                        ADDITIONS.
Def-Wide                 TEXAS                               Fort Bliss                HOSPITAL REPLACEMENT          239,884       -50,000       189,884
                                                                                        INCR 7.
Def-Wide                 TEXAS                               Joint Base San Antonio    AMBULATORY CARE CENTER         61,776                      61,776
                                                                                        PHASE 4.
Def-Wide                 VIRGINIA                            Arlington National        ARLINGTON CEMETERY                  0        30,000        30,000
                                                              Cemetery                  SOUTHERN EXPANSION
                                                                                        (DAR).
Def-Wide                 VIRGINIA                            Fort Belvoir              CONSTRUCT VISITOR               5,000                       5,000
                                                                                        CONTROL CENTER.
Def-Wide                 VIRGINIA                            Fort Belvoir              REPLACE GROUND VEHICLE          4,500                       4,500
                                                                                        FUELING FACILITY.
Def-Wide                 VIRGINIA                            Joint Base Langley-       REPLACE FUEL PIER AND          28,000                      28,000
                                                              Eustis                    DISTRIBUTION FACILITY.
Def-Wide                 VIRGINIA                            Joint Expeditionary Base  SOF APPLIED INSTRUCTION        23,916                      23,916
                                                              Little Creek--Story       FACILITY.
Def-Wide                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     CONTINGENCY                    10,000       -10,000             0
                                                              Locations                 CONSTRUCTION.
Def-Wide                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     ECIP DESIGN............        10,000                      10,000
                                                              Locations
Def-Wide                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     ENERGY CONSERVATION           150,000                     150,000
                                                              Locations                 INVESTMENT PROGRAM.
Def-Wide                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     EXERCISE RELATED MINOR          8,687                       8,687
                                                              Locations                 CONSTRUCTION.
Def-Wide                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     PLANNING AND DESIGN....         3,041                       3,041
                                                              Locations
Def-Wide                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     PLANNING AND DESIGN....        31,628                      31,628
                                                              Locations
Def-Wide                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     PLANNING AND DESIGN....         1,078                       1,078
                                                              Locations
Def-Wide                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     PLANNING AND DESIGN....        27,202                      27,202
                                                              Locations
Def-Wide                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     PLANNING AND DESIGN....        42,183                      42,183
                                                              Locations
Def-Wide                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     PLANNING AND DESIGN....        13,500                      13,500
                                                              Locations
Def-Wide                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     UNSPECIFIED MINOR               5,000                       5,000
                                                              Locations                 CONSTRUCTION.
Def-Wide                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     UNSPECIFIED MINOR               3,000                       3,000
                                                              Locations                 CONSTRUCTION.
Def-Wide                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     UNSPECIFIED MINOR              15,676                      15,676
                                                              Locations                 CONSTRUCTION.
Def-Wide                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Various Worldwide         EAST COAST MISSLE SITE              0        30,000        30,000
                                                              Locations                 PLANNING AND DESIGN.
Def-Wide                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Various Worldwide         PLANNING & DESIGN......        31,772                      31,772
                                                              Locations
      Military Construction, Defense-Wide Total                                                                    2,300,767      -360,888     1,939,879
                         ..................................  ........................
NATO                     WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Nato Security Investment  NATO SECURITY                 120,000        30,000       150,000
                                                              Program                   INVESTMENT PROGRAM.
      NATO Security Investment Program Total                                                                         120,000        30,000       150,000
                         ..................................  ........................
Army NG                  CONNECTICUT                         Camp Hartell              READY BUILDING (CST-           11,000                      11,000
                                                                                        WMD).
Army NG                  DELAWARE                            Dagsboro                  NATIONAL GUARD VEHICLE         10,800       -10,800             0
                                                                                        MAINTENANCE SHOP.
Army NG                  FLORIDA                             Palm Coast                NATIONAL GUARD                 18,000                      18,000
                                                                                        READINESS CENTER.
Army NG                  ILLINOIS                            Sparta                    BASIC 10M-25M FIRING            1,900                       1,900
                                                                                        RANGE (ZERO).
Army NG                  KANSAS                              Salina                    AUTOMATED COMBAT PISTOL/        2,400                       2,400
                                                                                        MP FIREARMS QUAL COUR.
Army NG                  KANSAS                              Salina                    MODIFIED RECORD FIRE            4,300                       4,300
                                                                                        RANGE.
Army NG                  MARYLAND                            Easton                    NATIONAL GUARD                 13,800                      13,800
                                                                                        READINESS CENTER.
Army NG                  NEVADA                              Reno                      NATIONAL GUARD VEHICLE          8,000                       8,000
                                                                                        MAINTENANCE SHOP ADD/A.
Army NG                  OHIO                                Camp Ravenna              MODIFIED RECORD FIRE            3,300                       3,300
                                                                                        RANGE.
Army NG                  OREGON                              Salem                     NATIONAL GUARD/RESERVE         16,500                      16,500
                                                                                        CENTER BLDG ADD/ALT (J.
Army NG                  PENNSYLVANIA                        Fort Indiantown Gap       TRAINING AIDS CENTER...        16,000                      16,000
Army NG                  VERMONT                             North Hyde Park           NATIONAL GUARD VEHICLE          7,900                       7,900
                                                                                        MAINTENANCE SHOP ADDIT.
Army NG                  VIRGINIA                            Richmond                  NATIONAL GUARD/RESERVE         29,000                      29,000
                                                                                        CENTER BUILDING (JFHQ).
Army NG                  WASHINGTON                          Yakima                    ENLISTED BARRACKS,             19,000       -19,000             0
                                                                                        TRANSIENT TRAINING.
Army NG                  WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     PLANNING AND DESIGN....        20,337                      20,337
                                                              Locations
Army NG                  WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     UNSPECIFIED MINOR              15,000                      15,000
                                                              Locations                 CONSTRUCTION.
      Military Construction, Army National Guard Total                                                               197,237       -29,800       167,437
                         ..................................  ........................
Army Res                 CALIFORNIA                          Miramar                   ARMY RESERVE CENTER....        24,000                      24,000
Army Res                 FLORIDA                             Macdill AFB               AR CENTER/ AS FACILITY.        55,000                      55,000
Army Res                 MISSISSIPPI                         Starkville                ARMY RESERVE CENTER....         9,300        -9,300             0
Army Res                 NEW YORK                            Orangeburg                ORGANIZATIONAL                  4,200                       4,200
                                                                                        MAINTENANCE SHOP.
Army Res                 PENNSYLVANIA                        Conneaut Lake             DAR HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT         5,000                       5,000
Army Res                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     PLANNING AND DESIGN....         9,318                       9,318
                                                              Locations
Army Res                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     UNSPECIFIED MINOR               6,777                       6,777
                                                              Locations                 CONSTRUCTION.
      Military Construction, Army Reserve Total                                                                      113,595        -9,300       104,295
                         ..................................  ........................
N/MC Res                 NEVADA                              Fallon                    NAVOPSPTCEN FALLON.....        11,480                      11,480
N/MC Res                 NEW YORK                            Brooklyn                  RESERVE CENTER STORAGE          2,479                       2,479
                                                                                        FACILITY.
N/MC Res                 VIRGINIA                            Dam Neck                  RESERVE TRAINING CENTER        18,443                      18,443
                                                                                        COMPLEX.
N/MC Res                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MCNR PLANNING & DESIGN.         2,208                       2,208
                                                              Locations
N/MC Res                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MCNR UNSPECIFIED MINOR          1,468                       1,468
                                                              Locations                 CONSTRUCTION.
      Military Construction, Naval Reserve Total                                                                      36,078             0        36,078
                         ..................................  ........................
Air NG                   ALABAMA                             Dannelly Field            TFI--REPLACE SQUADRON           7,600                       7,600
                                                                                        OPERATIONS FACILITY.
Air NG                   ARKANSAS                            Fort Smith Map            CONSOLIDATED SCIF......             0                           0
Air NG                   CALIFORNIA                          Moffett Field             REPLACE VEHICLE                 6,500                       6,500
                                                                                        MAINTENANCE FACILITY.
Air NG                   COLORADO                            Buckley Air Force Base    ASE MAINTENANCE AND             5,100                       5,100
                                                                                        STORAGE FACILITY.
Air NG                   GEORGIA                             Savannah/Hilton Head IAP  C-130 SQUADRON                  9,000                       9,000
                                                                                        OPERATIONS FACILITY.
Air NG                   IOWA                                Des Moines MAP            AIR OPERATIONS GRP/             6,700                       6,700
                                                                                        CYBER BEDDOWN-RENO BLG
                                                                                        430.
Air NG                   KANSAS                              Smokey Hill ANG Range     RANGE TRAINING SUPPORT          2,900                       2,900
                                                                                        FACILITIES.
Air NG                   LOUISIANA                           New Orleans               REPLACE SQUADRON               10,000                      10,000
                                                                                        OPERATIONS FACILITY.
Air NG                   MAINE                               Bangor IAP                ADD TO AND ALTER FIRE           7,200                       7,200
                                                                                        CRASH/RESCUE STATION.
Air NG                   NEW HAMPSHIRE                       Pease International       KC-46A ADAL FLIGHT              2,800                       2,800
                                                              Trade Port                SIMULATOR BLDG 156.
Air NG                   NEW JERSEY                          Atlantic City IAP         FUEL CELL AND CORROSION        10,200                      10,200
                                                                                        CONTROL HANGAR.
Air NG                   NEW YORK                            Niagara Falls IAP         REMOTELY PILOTED                7,700                       7,700
                                                                                        AIRCRAFT BEDDOWN BLDG
                                                                                        912.
Air NG                   NORTH CAROLINA                      Charlotte/Douglas IAP     REPLACE C-130 SQUADRON          9,000                       9,000
                                                                                        OPERATIONS FACILITY.
Air NG                   NORTH DAKOTA                        Hector IAP                INTEL TARGETING                 7,300                       7,300
                                                                                        FACILITIES.
Air NG                   OKLAHOMA                            Will Rogers World         MEDIUM ALTITUDE MANNED          7,600                       7,600
                                                              Airport                   ISR BEDDOWN.
Air NG                   OREGON                              Klamath Falls IAP         REPLACE FIRE CRASH/             7,200                       7,200
                                                                                        RESCUE STATION.
Air NG                   WEST VIRGINIA                       Yeager Airport            FORCE PROTECTION-               3,900                       3,900
                                                                                        RELOCATE COONSKIN ROAD.
Air NG                   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Various Worldwide         PLANNING AND DESIGN....         5,104                       5,104
                                                              Locations
Air NG                   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Various Worldwide         UNSPECIFIED MINOR               7,734                       7,734
                                                              Locations                 CONSTRUCTION.
      Military Construction, Air National Guard Total                                                                123,538             0       123,538
                         ..................................  ........................
AF Res                   ARIZONA                             Davis-Monthan AFB         GUARDIAN ANGEL                      0                           0
                                                                                        OPERATIONS.
AF Res                   CALIFORNIA                          March AFB                 SATELLITE FIRE STATION.         4,600                       4,600
AF Res                   FLORIDA                             Patrick AFB               AIRCREW LIFE SUPPORT            3,400                       3,400
                                                                                        FACILITY.
AF Res                   OHIO                                Youngstown                INDOOR FIRING RANGE....         9,400                       9,400
AF Res                   TEXAS                               Joint Base San Antonio    CONSOLIDATE 433 MEDICAL         9,900                       9,900
                                                                                        FACILITY.
AF Res                   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Various Worldwide         PLANNING AND DESIGN....        13,400                      13,400
                                                              Locations
AF Res                   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Various Worldwide         UNSPECIFIED MINOR               6,121                       6,121
                                                              Locations                 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION.
      Military Construction, Air Force Reserve Total                                                                  46,821             0        46,821
                         ..................................  ........................
FH Con Army              FLORIDA                             Camp Rudder               FAMILY HOUSING                  8,000                       8,000
                                                                                        REPLACEMENT
                                                                                        CONSTRUCTION.
FH Con Army              GERMANY                             Wiesbaden Army Airfield   FAMILY HOUSING                  3,500                       3,500
                                                                                        IMPROVEMENTS.
FH Con Army              ILLINOIS                            Rock Island               FAMILY HOUSING                 20,000                      20,000
                                                                                        REPLACEMENT
                                                                                        CONSTRUCTION.
FH Con Army              KOREA                               Camp Walker               FAMILY HOUSING NEW             61,000                      61,000
                                                                                        CONSTRUCTION.
FH Con Army              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     FAMILY HOUSING P & D...         7,195                       7,195
                                                              Locations
      Family Housing Construction, Army Total                                                                         99,695             0        99,695
                         ..................................  ........................
FH Ops Army              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     FURNISHINGS............        25,552                      25,552
                                                              Locations
FH Ops Army              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     LEASED HOUSING.........       144,879                     144,879
                                                              Locations
FH Ops Army              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MAINTENANCE OF REAL            75,197                      75,197
                                                              Locations                 PROPERTY FACILITIES.
FH Ops Army              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT.....         3,047                       3,047
                                                              Locations
FH Ops Army              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT.....        45,468                      45,468
                                                              Locations
FH Ops Army              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MILITARY HOUSING               22,000                      22,000
                                                              Locations                 PRIVITIZATION
                                                                                        INITIATIVE.
FH Ops Army              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MISCELLANEOUS..........           840                         840
                                                              Locations
FH Ops Army              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     SERVICES...............        10,928                      10,928
                                                              Locations
FH Ops Army              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     UTILITIES..............        65,600                      65,600
                                                              Locations
      Family Housing Operation And Maintenance, Army Total                                                           393,511             0       393,511
                         ..................................  ........................
FH Con AF                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     IMPROVEMENTS...........       150,649                     150,649
                                                              Locations
FH Con AF                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     PLANNING AND DESIGN....         9,849                       9,849
                                                              Locations
      Family Housing Construction, Air Force Total                                                                   160,498             0       160,498
                         ..................................  ........................
FH Ops AF                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     FURNISHINGS ACCOUNT....        38,746                      38,746
                                                              Locations
FH Ops AF                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     HOUSING PRIVATIZATION..        41,554                      41,554
                                                              Locations
FH Ops AF                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     LEASING................        28,867                      28,867
                                                              Locations
FH Ops AF                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MAINTENANCE............       114,129                     114,129
                                                              Locations
FH Ops AF                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT.....        52,153                      52,153
                                                              Locations
FH Ops AF                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MISCELLANEOUS ACCOUNT..         2,032                       2,032
                                                              Locations
FH Ops AF                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     SERVICES ACCOUNT.......        12,940                      12,940
                                                              Locations
FH Ops AF                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     UTILITIES ACCOUNT......        40,811                      40,811
                                                              Locations
      Family Housing Operation And Maintenance, Air Force Total                                                      331,232             0       331,232
                         ..................................  ........................
FH Con Navy              VIRGINIA                            Wallops Island            CONSTRUCT HOUSING                 438                         438
                                                                                        WELCOME CENTER.
FH Con Navy              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     DESIGN.................         4,588                       4,588
                                                              Locations
FH Con Navy              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     IMPROVEMENTS...........        11,515                      11,515
                                                              Locations
      Family Housing Construction, Navy And Marine Corps Total                                                        16,541             0        16,541
                         ..................................  ........................
FH Ops Navy              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     FURNISHINGS ACCOUNT....        17,534                      17,534
                                                              Locations
FH Ops Navy              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     LEASING................        64,108                      64,108
                                                              Locations
FH Ops Navy              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MAINTENANCE OF REAL            99,323                      99,323
                                                              Locations                 PROPERTY.
FH Ops Navy              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT.....        56,189                      56,189
                                                              Locations
FH Ops Navy              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MISCELLANEOUS ACCOUNT..           373                         373
                                                              Locations
FH Ops Navy              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     PRIVATIZATION SUPPORT          28,668                      28,668
                                                              Locations                 COSTS.
FH Ops Navy              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     SERVICES ACCOUNT.......        19,149                      19,149
                                                              Locations
FH Ops Navy              WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     UTILITIES ACCOUNT......        67,692                      67,692
                                                              Locations
      Family Housing Operation And Maintenance, Navy And Marine Corps Total                                          353,036             0       353,036
                         ..................................  ........................
FH Ops DW                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     FURNISHINGS ACCOUNT....         3,402                       3,402
                                                              Locations
FH Ops DW                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     FURNISHINGS ACCOUNT....            20                          20
                                                              Locations
FH Ops DW                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     FURNISHINGS ACCOUNT....           781                         781
                                                              Locations
FH Ops DW                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     LEASING................        10,679                      10,679
                                                              Locations
FH Ops DW                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     LEASING................        41,273                      41,273
                                                              Locations
FH Ops DW                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MAINTENANCE OF REAL             1,104                       1,104
                                                              Locations                 PROPERTY.
FH Ops DW                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MAINTENANCE OF REAL               344                         344
                                                              Locations                 PROPERTY.
FH Ops DW                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT.....           388                         388
                                                              Locations
FH Ops DW                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     SERVICES ACCOUNT.......            31                          31
                                                              Locations
FH Ops DW                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     UTILITIES ACCOUNT......           474                         474
                                                              Locations
FH Ops DW                WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     UTILITIES ACCOUNT......           172                         172
                                                              Locations
      Family Housing Operation And Maintenance, Defense-Wide Total                                                    58,668             0        58,668
                         ..................................  ........................
BRAC                     WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Base Realignment &        BASE REALIGNMENT AND           29,691                      29,691
                                                              Closure, Army             CLOSURE.
      Base Realignment and Closure--Army Total                                                                        29,691             0        29,691
                         ..................................  ........................
BRAC                     WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Base Realignment &        BASE REALIGNMENT &            118,906                     118,906
                                                              Closure, Navy             CLOSURE.
BRAC                     WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     DON-100: PLANING,               7,787                       7,787
                                                              Locations                 DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT.
BRAC                     WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     DON-101: VARIOUS               20,871                      20,871
                                                              Locations                 LOCATIONS.
BRAC                     WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     DON-138: NAS BRUNSWICK,           803                         803
                                                              Locations                 ME.
BRAC                     WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     DON-157: MCSA KANSAS               41                          41
                                                              Locations                 CITY, MO.
BRAC                     WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     DON-172: NWS SEAL               4,872                       4,872
                                                              Locations                 BEACH, CONCORD, CA.
BRAC                     WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     DON-84: JRB WILLOW              3,808                       3,808
                                                              Locations                 GROVE & CAMBRIA REG AP.
      Base Realignment and Closure--Navy Total                                                                       157,088             0       157,088
                         ..................................  ........................
BRAC                     WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     DOD BRAC ACTIVITIES--          64,555                      64,555
                                                              Locations                 AIR FORCE.
      Base Realignment and Closure--Air Force Total                                                                   64,555             0        64,555
                         ..................................  ........................
PYS                      WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     AIR FORCE..............             0       -52,600       -52,600
                                                              Locations
PYS                      WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     ARMY...................             0       -96,000       -96,000
                                                              Locations
PYS                      WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     DEFENSE-WIDE...........             0      -134,000      -134,000
                                                              Locations
PYS                      WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED               Unspecified Worldwide     HOUSING ASSISTANCE                  0      -103,918      -103,918
                                                              Locations                 PROGRAM.
      Prior Year Savings Total                                                                                             0      -386,518      -386,518
                         ..................................  ........................
      Total, Military Construction                                                                                 8,306,510    -1,155,510     7,151,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SEC. 4602. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             SEC. 4602. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                   FY 2016                      House
        Account                 State/ Country                Installation                Project Title            Request    House Change    Agreement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army                     Cuba                         Guantanamo Bay               UNACCOMPANIED PERSONNEL                 0        76,000        76,000
                                                                                    HOUSING.
      Military Construction, Army Total                                                                                    0        76,000        76,000
                         ...........................  ...........................
Navy                     Bahrain                      Bahrain Island               MINA SALMAN PIER                        0        37,700        37,700
                                                                                    REPLACEMENT.
Navy                     Bahrain                      Bahrain Island               SHIP MAINTENANCE SUPPORT                0        52,091        52,091
                                                                                    FACILITY.
Navy                     Italy                        Sigonella                    P-8A HANGAR AND FLEET                   0        62,302        62,302
                                                                                    SUPPORT FACILITY.
Navy                     Italy                        Sigonella                    TRITON HANGAR AND OPERATION             0        40,641        40,641
                                                                                    FACILITY.
Navy                     Poland                       Redzikowo                    AEGIS SHORE MISSILE DEFENSE             0        51,270        51,270
                                                                                    COMPLEX.
      Military Construction, Navy Total                                                                                    0       244,004       244,004
                         ...........................  ...........................
AF                       Niger                        Agadez                       CONSTRUCT AIR FIELD AND                 0        50,000        50,000
                                                                                    BASE CAMP.
AF                       Oman                         Al Mussanah AB               AIRLIFT APRON..............             0        25,000        25,000
      Military Construction, Air Force Total                                                                               0        75,000        75,000
                         ...........................  ...........................
Def-Wide                 Djibouti                     Camp Lemonier                CONSTRUCT FUEL STORAGE AND              0        43,700        43,700
                                                                                    DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES.
Def-Wide                 Poland                       Redzikowo                    AEGIS SHORE MISSILE DEFENSE             0        93,296        93,296
                                                                                    COMPLEX.
      Military Construction, Defense-Wide Total                                                                            0       136,996       136,996
                         ...........................  ...........................
      Total, Military Construction                                                                                         0       532,000       532,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


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)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                      House
                          Program                           FY 2016  Request    House  Change      Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discretionary Summary By Appropriation
  Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies
  Appropriation Summary:
    Energy Programs
      Nuclear Energy......................................           135,161               0             135,161
 
    Atomic Energy Defense Activities
      National nuclear security administration:
        Weapons activities................................         8,846,948         237,700           9,084,648
        Defense nuclear nonproliferation..................         1,940,302         -39,000           1,901,302
        Naval reactors....................................         1,375,496          12,000           1,387,496
        Federal salaries and expenses.....................           402,654          -6,000             396,654
      Total, National nuclear security administration.....        12,565,400         204,700          12,770,100
 
      Environmental and other defense activities:
        Defense environmental cleanup.....................         5,527,347        -384,197           5,143,150
        Other defense activities..........................           774,425           4,200             778,625
      Total, Environmental & other defense activities.....         6,301,772        -379,997           5,921,775
    Total, Atomic Energy Defense Activities...............        18,867,172        -175,297          18,691,875
Total, Discretionary Funding..............................        19,002,333        -175,297          18,827,036
 
Nuclear Energy
  Idaho sitewide safeguards and security..................           126,161                             126,161
  Used nuclear fuel disposition...........................             9,000                               9,000
Total, Nuclear Energy.....................................           135,161               0             135,161
 
Weapons Activities
  Directed stockpile work
    Life extension programs
      B61 Life extension program..........................           643,300                             643,300
      W76 Life extension program..........................           244,019                             244,019
      W88 Alt 370.........................................           220,176                             220,176
      W80-4 Life extension program........................           195,037                             195,037
    Total, Life extension programs........................         1,302,532               0           1,302,532
 
    Stockpile systems
      B61 Stockpile systems...............................            52,247          21,000              73,247
      W76 Stockpile systems...............................            50,921                              50,921
      W78 Stockpile systems...............................            64,092                              64,092
      W80 Stockpile systems...............................            68,005                              68,005
      B83 Stockpile systems...............................            42,177           9,000              51,177
      W87 Stockpile systems...............................            89,299                              89,299
      W88 Stockpile systems...............................           115,685                             115,685
    Total, Stockpile systems..............................           482,426          30,000             512,426
 
    Weapons dismantlement and disposition
      Operations and maintenance..........................            48,049                              48,049
 
    Stockpile services
      Production support..................................           447,527                             447,527
      Research and development support....................            34,159                              34,159
      R&D certification and safety........................           192,613          11,200             203,813
      Management, technology, and production..............           264,994                             264,994
    Total, Stockpile services.............................           939,293          11,200             950,493
 
    Nuclear material commodities
      Uranium sustainment.................................            32,916                              32,916
      Plutonium sustainment...............................           174,698           8,400             183,098
      Tritium sustainment.................................           107,345                             107,345
      Domestic uranium enrichment.........................           100,000                             100,000
    Total, Nuclear material commodities...................           414,959           8,400             423,359
  Total, Directed stockpile work..........................         3,187,259          49,600           3,236,859
 
  Research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E)
    Science
      Advanced certification..............................            50,714                              50,714
      Primary assessment technologies.....................            98,500          21,600             120,100
      Dynamic materials properties........................           109,000                             109,000
      Advanced radiography................................            47,000                              47,000
      Secondary assessment technologies...................            84,400                              84,400
    Total, Science........................................           389,614          21,600             411,214
 
    Engineering
      Enhanced surety.....................................            50,821           1,100              51,921
      Weapon systems engineering assessment technology....            17,371                              17,371
      Nuclear survivability...............................            24,461           2,400              26,861
      Enhanced surveillance...............................            38,724                              38,724
    Total, Engineering ...................................           131,377           3,500             134,877
 
    Inertial confinement fusion ignition and high yield
      Ignition............................................            73,334          -6,000              67,334
      Support of other stockpile programs.................            22,843                              22,843
      Diagnostics, cryogenics and experimental support....            58,587                              58,587
      Pulsed power inertial confinement fusion............             4,963                               4,963
      Joint program in high energy density laboratory                  8,900                               8,900
       plasmas............................................
      Facility operations and target production...........           333,823         -11,000             322,823
    Total, Inertial confinement fusion and high yield.....           502,450         -17,000             485,450
 
    Advanced simulation and computing.....................           623,006          -6,000             617,006
 
    Advanced manufacturing
      Component manufacturing development.................           112,256                             112,256
      Processing technology development...................            17,800                              17,800
    Total, Advanced manufacturing.........................           130,056               0             130,056
  Total, RDT&E............................................         1,776,503           2,100           1,778,603
 
  Readiness in technical base and facilities (RTBF)
    Operating
      Program readiness...................................            75,185                              75,185
      Material recycle and recovery.......................           173,859                             173,859
      Storage.............................................            40,920                              40,920
      Recapitalization....................................           104,327                             104,327
    Total, Operating......................................           394,291               0             394,291
 
    Construction:
      15-D-302, TA-55 Reinvestment project, Phase 3, LANL.            18,195                              18,195
      11-D-801 TA-55 Reinvestment project Phase 2, LANL...             3,903                               3,903
      07-D-220 Radioactive liquid waste treatment facility            11,533                              11,533
       upgrade project, LANL..............................
      07-D-220-04 Transuranic liquid waste facility, LANL.            40,949                              40,949
      06-D-141 PED/Construction, Uranium Capabilities                430,000                             430,000
       Replacement Project Y-12...........................
      04-D-125 Chemistry and metallurgy replacement                  155,610                             155,610
       project, LANL......................................
    Total, Construction...................................           660,190               0             660,190
  Total, Readiness in technical base and facilities.......         1,054,481               0           1,054,481
 
  Secure transportation asset
    Operations and equipment..............................           146,272                             146,272
    Program direction.....................................           105,338                             105,338
  Total, Secure transportation asset......................           251,610               0             251,610
 
  Infrastructure and safety
    Operations of facilities
      Kansas City Plant...................................           100,250                             100,250
      Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory..............            70,671                              70,671
      Los Alamos National Laboratory......................           196,460                             196,460
      Nevada National Security Site.......................            89,000                              89,000
      Pantex..............................................            58,021                              58,021
      Sandia National Laboratory..........................           115,300                             115,300
      Savannah River Site.................................            80,463                              80,463
      Y-12 National security complex......................           120,625                             120,625
    Total, Operations of facilities.......................           830,790               0             830,790
 
    Safety operations.....................................           107,701                             107,701
    Maintenance...........................................           227,000          24,000             251,000
    Recapitalization......................................           257,724         150,000             407,724
    Construction:
      16-D-621 Substation replacement at TA-3, LANL.......            25,000                              25,000
      15-D-613 Emergency Operations Center, Y-12..........            17,919                              17,919
    Total, Construction...................................            42,919               0              42,919
  Total, Infrastructure and safety........................         1,466,134         174,000           1,640,134
 
  Site stewardship
    Nuclear materials integration.........................            17,510                              17,510
    Minority serving institution partnerships program.....            19,085                              19,085
  Total, Site stewardship.................................            36,595               0              36,595
 
  Defense nuclear security
    Operations and maintenance............................           619,891          12,000             631,891
    Construction:
      14-D-710 Device assembly facility argus installation            13,000                              13,000
       project, NV........................................
  Total, Defense nuclear security.........................           632,891          12,000             644,891
 
  Information technology and cybersecurity................           157,588                             157,588
  Legacy contractor pensions..............................           283,887                             283,887
Total, Weapons Activities.................................         8,846,948         237,700           9,084,648
 
 
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation
  Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Programs
    Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation R&D
      Global material security............................           426,751         -90,000             336,751
      Material management and minimization................           311,584          20,000             331,584
      Nonproliferation and arms control...................           126,703                             126,703
      Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation R&D................           419,333          20,000             439,333
 
      Nonproliferation Construction:
        99-D-143 Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication                  345,000                             345,000
         Facility, SRS....................................
      Total, Nonproliferation construction................           345,000               0             345,000
    Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Programs......         1,629,371         -50,000           1,579,371
 
  Legacy contractor pensions..............................            94,617                              94,617
  Nuclear counterterrorism and incident response program..           234,390          11,000             245,390
  Use of prior-year balances..............................           -18,076                             -18,076
Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation...................         1,940,302         -39,000           1,901,302
 
 
Naval Reactors
  Naval reactors operations and infrastructure............           445,196                             445,196
  Naval reactors development..............................           444,400                             444,400
  Ohio replacement reactor systems development............           186,800                             186,800
  S8G Prototype refueling.................................           133,000                             133,000
  Program direction.......................................            45,000                              45,000
  Construction:
    15-D-904 NRF Overpack Storage Expansion 3.............               900                                 900
    15-D-903 KL Fire System Upgrade.......................               600                                 600
    15-D-902 KS Engineroom team trainer facility..........             3,100                               3,100
    14-D-902 KL Materials characterization laboratory                 30,000                              30,000
     expansion, KAPL......................................
    14-D-901 Spent fuel handling recapitalization project,            86,000          12,000              98,000
     NRF..................................................
    10-D-903, Security upgrades, KAPL.....................               500                                 500
  Total, Construction.....................................           121,100          12,000             133,100
Total, Naval Reactors.....................................         1,375,496          12,000           1,387,496
 
 
Federal Salaries And Expenses
  Program direction.......................................           402,654          -6,000             396,654
Total, Office Of The Administrator........................           402,654          -6,000             396,654
 
 
Defense Environmental Cleanup
  Closure sites:
    Closure sites administration..........................             4,889                               4,889
 
  Hanford site:
    River corridor and other cleanup operations:
      River corridor and other cleanup operations.........           196,957          72,000             268,957
 
    Central plateau remediation:
      Central plateau remediation.........................           555,163                             555,163
    Richland community and regulatory support.............            14,701                              14,701
    Construction:
      15-D-401 Containerized sludge removal annex, RL.....            77,016                              77,016
  Total, Hanford site.....................................           843,837          72,000             915,837
 
  Idaho National Laboratory:
    Idaho cleanup and waste disposition...................           357,783                             357,783
    Idaho community and regulatory support................             3,000                               3,000
  Total, Idaho National Laboratory........................           360,783               0             360,783
 
  NNSA sites
    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory................             1,366                               1,366
    Nevada................................................            62,385                              62,385
    Sandia National Laboratories..........................             2,500                               2,500
    Los Alamos National Laboratory........................           188,625                             188,625
  Total, NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites..................           254,876               0             254,876
 
  Oak Ridge Reservation:
    OR Nuclear facility D & D
      OR Nuclear facility D & D...........................            75,958                              75,958
      Construction:
        14-D-403 Outfall 200 Mercury Treatment Facility...             6,800                               6,800
    Total, OR Nuclear facility D & D......................            82,758               0              82,758
 
    U233 Disposition Program..............................            26,895                              26,895
 
    OR cleanup and disposition:
      OR cleanup and disposition..........................            60,500                              60,500
    Total, OR cleanup and disposition.....................            60,500               0              60,500
 
  OR reservation community and regulatory support.........             4,400                               4,400
  Solid waste stabilization and disposition
         Oak Ridge technology development.................             2,800                               2,800
  Total, Oak Ridge Reservation............................           177,353               0             177,353
 
  Office of River Protection:
    Waste treatment and immobilization plant
      01-D-416 A-D/ORP-0060 / Major construction..........           595,000                             595,000
      01-D-16E Pretreatment facility......................            95,000                              95,000
    Total, Waste treatment and immobilization plant.......           690,000               0             690,000
 
    Tank farm activities
      Rad liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition.           649,000                             649,000
      Construction:
        15-D-409 Low Activity Waste Pretreatment System,              75,000                              75,000
         Hanford..........................................
    Total, Tank farm activities...........................           724,000               0             724,000
  Total, Office of River protection.......................         1,414,000               0           1,414,000
 
  Savannah River sites:
    Savannah River risk management operations.............           386,652          11,600             398,252
    SR community and regulatory support...................            11,249                              11,249
 
    Radioactive liquid tank waste:
      Radioactive liquid tank waste stabilization and                581,878                             581,878
       disposition........................................
      Construction:
        15-D-402--Saltstone Disposal Unit #6..............            34,642                              34,642
        05-D-405 Salt waste processing facility, Savannah            194,000                             194,000
         River............................................
      Total, Construction.................................           228,642               0             228,642
    Total, Radioactive liquid tank waste..................           810,520               0             810,520
  Total, Savannah River site..............................         1,208,421          11,600           1,220,021
 
  Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
    Waste isolation pilot plant...........................           212,600                             212,600
        Construction:
          15-D-411 Safety significant confinement                     23,218                              23,218
           ventilation system, WIPP.......................
          15-D-412 Exhaust shaft, WIPP....................             7,500                               7,500
        Total, Construction...............................            30,718               0              30,718
      Total, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant..................           243,318               0             243,318
 
  Program direction.......................................           281,951                             281,951
  Program support.........................................            14,979                              14,979
 
  Safeguards and Security:
    Oak Ridge Reservation.................................            17,228                              17,228
    Paducah...............................................             8,216                               8,216
    Portsmouth............................................             8,492                               8,492
    Richland/Hanford Site.................................            67,601                              67,601
    Savannah River Site...................................           128,345                             128,345
    Waste Isolation Pilot Project.........................             4,860                               4,860
    West Valley...........................................             1,891                               1,891
  Technology development..................................            14,510           4,000              18,510
Subtotal, Defense environmental cleanup...................         5,055,550          87,600           5,143,150
 
  Uranium enrichment D&D fund contribution................           471,797        -471,797                   0
 
Total, Defense Environmental Cleanup......................         5,527,347        -384,197           5,143,150
 
 
Other Defense Activities
  Specialized security activities.........................           221,855           4,200             226,055
 
  Environment, health, safety and security
    Environment, health, safety and security..............           120,693                             120,693
    Program direction.....................................            63,105                              63,105
  Total, Environment, Health, safety and security.........           183,798               0             183,798
 
  Enterprise assessments
    Enterprise assessments................................            24,068                              24,068
    Program direction.....................................            49,466                              49,466
  Total, Enterprise assessments...........................            73,534               0              73,534
 
  Office of Legacy Management
    Legacy management.....................................           154,080                             154,080
    Program direction.....................................            13,100                              13,100
  Total, Office of Legacy Management......................           167,180               0             167,180
 
  Defense-related activities
  Defense related administrative support
    Chief financial officer...............................            35,758                              35,758
    Chief information officer.............................            83,800                              83,800
    Management............................................             3,000                               3,000
  Total, Defense related administrative support...........           122,558               0             122,558
 
  Office of hearings and appeals..........................             5,500                               5,500
Subtotal, Other defense activities........................           774,425           4,200             778,625
Total, Other Defense Activities...........................           774,425           4,200             778,625
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

              DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION REQUEST

    The Department of Defense requested legislation, in 
accordance with the program of the President, as illustrated by 
the correspondence set out below:
                                                     March 2, 2015.
Hon. John Boehner,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Speaker: Enclosed please find a draft of proposed 
legislation titled the ``National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2016'', that the Department of Defense requests be 
enacted during the first session of the 114th Congress.
    The purpose of each provision in the proposed bill is 
stated in the accompanying section-by-section analysis.
    The Department is currently working with the Administration 
on additional legislative initiatives, which the Department 
hopes to transmit to Congress for its consideration in the 
coming weeks.
    The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is 
no objection, from the standpoint of the Administration's 
program, to the presenting of these legislative proposals for 
your consideration and the consideration of Congress.
            Sincerely,
                                                 Michael J. Stella.
    Enclosure: As Stated.
                                ------                                

                                                    March 17, 2015.
Hon. John Boehner,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Speaker: Enclosed please find additional 
legislative proposals that the Department of Defense requests 
be enacted during the first session of the 114th Congress. The 
purpose of each proposal is stated in the accompanying section-
by-section analysis. These proposals are submitted by the 
Department as a follow-on to the earlier transmittal of our 
request for enactment of proposed legislation titled the 
``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016.''
    The Department is currently working with the Administration 
on additional legislative initiatives, which the Department 
hopes to transmit to Congress for its consideration in the 
coming weeks.
    The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is 
no objection, from the standpoint of the Administration's 
program, to the presenting of these legislative proposals for 
your consideration and the consideration of Congress.
            Sincerely,
                                                 Michael J. Stella.
    Enclosure: As Stated.
                                ------                                

                                                    March 23, 2015.
Hon. John Boehner,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Speaker: Enclosed please find additional 
legislative proposals that the Department of Defense requests 
be enacted during the first session of the 114th Congress. The 
purpose of each proposal is stated in the accompanying section-
by-section analysis. These proposals are submitted by the 
Department as a follow-on to the earlier transmittal of our 
request for enactment of proposed legislation titled the 
``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016.''
    The Department is currently working with the Administration 
on additional legislative initiatives, which the Department 
hopes to transmit to Congress for its consideration in the 
coming weeks.
    The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is 
no objection, from the standpoint of the Administration's 
program, to the presenting of these legislative proposals for 
your consideration and the consideration of Congress.
            Sincerely,
                                                 Michael J. Stella.
    Enclosure: As Stated.
                                ------                                

                                                     April 3, 2015.
Hon. John Boehner,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Speaker: Enclosed please find additional 
legislative proposals that the Department of Defense requests 
be enacted during the first session of the 114th Congress. The 
purpose of each proposal is stated in the accompanying section-
by-section analysis. These proposals are submitted by the 
Department as a follow-on to the earlier transmittal of our 
request for enactment of proposed legislation titled the 
``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016''.
    The Department is currently working with the Administration 
on additional legislative initiatives, which the Department 
hopes to transmit to Congress for its consideration in the 
coming weeks.
    The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is 
no objection, from the standpoint of the Administration's 
program, to the presenting of these legislative proposals for 
your consideration and the consideration of Congress.
            Sincerely,
                                                 Michael J. Stella.
    Enclosure: As Stated.
                                ------                                

                                                    April 10, 2015.
Hon. John Boehner,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Speaker: Enclosed please find additional 
legislative proposals that the Department of Defense requests 
be enacted during the first session of the 114th Congress. The 
purpose of each proposal is stated in the accompanying section-
by-section analysis. These proposals are submitted by the 
Department as a follow-on to the earlier transmittal of our 
request for enactment of proposed legislation titled the 
``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016''.
    The Department is currently working with the Administration 
on additional legislative initiatives, which the Department 
hopes to transmit to Congress for its consideration in the 
coming weeks.
    The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is 
no objection, from the standpoint of the Administration's 
program, to the presenting of these legislative proposals for 
your consideration and the consideration of Congress.
            Sincerely,
                                                 Michael J. Stella.
    Enclosure: As Stated.
                                ------                                

                                                    April 15, 2015.
Hon. John Boehner,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Speaker: Enclosed please find additional 
legislative proposals that the Department of Defense requests 
be enacted during the first session of the 114th Congress. The 
purpose of each proposal is stated in the accompanying section-
by-section analysis. These proposals are submitted by the 
Department as a follow-on to the earlier transmittal of our 
request for enactment of proposed legislation titled the 
``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016''.
    The Department is currently working with the Administration 
on additional legislative initiatives, which the Department 
hopes to transmit to Congress for its consideration in the 
coming weeks.
    The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is 
no objection, from the standpoint of the Administration's 
program, to the presenting of these legislative proposals for 
your consideration and the consideration of Congress.
            Sincerely,
                                                 Michael J. Stella.
    Enclosure: As Stated.
                                ------                                

                                                    April 23, 2015.
Hon. John Boehner,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Speaker: Enclosed please find additional 
legislative proposals that the Department of Defense requests 
be enacted during the first session of the 114th Congress. The 
purpose of each proposal is stated in the accompanying section-
by-section analysis. These proposals are submitted by the 
Department as a follow-on to the earlier transmittal of our 
request for enactment of proposed legislation titled the 
``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016''.
    The Department is currently working with the Administration 
on additional legislative initiatives, which the Department 
hopes to transmit to Congress for its consideration in the 
coming weeks.
    The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is 
no objection, from the standpoint of the Administration's 
program, to the presenting of these legislative proposals for 
your consideration and the consideration of Congress.
            Sincerely,
                                                 Michael J. Stella.
    Enclosure: As Stated.
                                ------                                


                  COMMUNICATIONS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES

                          House of Representatives,
                                 Committee on Algriculture,
                                    Washington, DC, April 28, 2015.
Hon. William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Thornberry: I am writing concerning H.R. 1735, the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016.
    This legislation contains provisions within the Committee 
on Agriculture's Rule X jurisdiction. As a result of your 
having consulted with the Committee and in order to expedite 
this bill for floor consideration, the Committee on Agriculture 
will forego action on the bill. This is being done on the basis 
of our mutual understanding that doing so will in no way 
diminish or alter the jurisdiction of the Committee on 
Agriculture with respect to the appointment of conferees, or to 
any future jurisdictional claim over the subject matters 
contained in the bill or similar legislation.
    I would appreciate your response to this letter confirming 
this understanding, and would request that you include a copy 
of this letter and your response in the Committee Report and in 
the Congressional Record during the floor consideration of this 
bill. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
            Sincerely,
                                        K. Michael Conaway,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. K. Michael Conaway,
Chairman, Committee on Agriculture,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
1735, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016. I agree that the Committee on Agriculture has a valid 
jurisdictional claim to a provision in this important 
legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to 
request a referral in the interest of expediting consideration 
of the bill. I agree that by foregoing a sequential referral, 
the Committee on Agriculture is not waiving its jurisdiction. 
Further, this exchange of letters will be included in the 
committee report on the bill.
            Sincerely,
                             William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                          Committee on Energy and Commerce,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: I write to confirm our mutual 
understanding regarding H.R. 1735, the ``National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016.'' While the legislation 
does contain provisions within the jurisdiction of the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce, the Committee will not 
request a sequential referral so that it can proceed 
expeditiously to the House floor for consideration.
    The Committee takes this action with the understanding that 
its jurisdictional interests over this and similar legislation 
are in no way diminished or altered, and that the Committee 
will be appropriately consulted and involved as such 
legislation moves forward. The Committee also reserves the 
right to seek appointment to any House-Senate conference on 
such legislation and requests your support when such a request 
is made.
    Finally, I would appreciate a response to this letter 
confirming this understanding and ask that a copy of our 
exchange of letters be included in the Congressional Record 
during consideration of H.R. 1735 on the House floor.
            Sincerely,
                                                Fred Upton,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. Fred Upton,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
1735, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016. I agree that the Committee on Energy and Commerce has 
valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this 
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your 
decision not to request a referral in the interest of 
expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing 
a sequential referral, the Committee on Energy and Commerce is 
not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters 
will be included in the committee report on the bill.
            Sincerely,
                             William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                  Committee on Education and the Workforce,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to confirm our mutual 
understanding with respect to H.R. 1735, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016. Thank you for 
consulting with the Committee on Education and the Workforce 
with regard to H.R. 1735 on those matters within the 
Committee's jurisdiction.
    In the interest of expediting the House's consideration of 
H.R. 1735, the Committee on Education and the Workforce will 
forgo further consideration of this bill. However, I do so only 
with the understanding this procedural route will not be 
construed to prejudice my Committee's jurisdictional interest 
and prerogatives on this bill or any other similar legislation 
and will not be considered as precedent for consideration of 
matters of jurisdictional interest to my Committee in the 
future.
    I respectfully request your support for the appointment of 
outside conferees from the Committee on Education and the 
Workforce should this bill or a similar bill be considered in a 
conference with the Senate. I also request you include our 
exchange of letters on this matter in the Committee Report on 
H.R. 1735 and in the Congressional Record during consideration 
of this bill on the House Floor. Thank you for your attention 
to these matters.
            Sincerely,
                                                John Kline,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. John Kline,
Chairman, Committee on Education and the Workforce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
1735, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016. I agree that the Committee on Education and the Workforce 
has valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this 
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your 
decision not to request a referral in the interest of 
expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing 
a sequential referral, the Committee on Education and the 
Workforce is not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this 
exchange of letters will be included in the committee report on 
the bill.
            Sincerely,
                             William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                              Committee on Foreign Affairs,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: I write to confirm our mutual 
understanding regarding H.R. 1735, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016, which contains 
substantial matter that falls within the Rule X legislative 
jurisdiction of the Foreign Affairs Committee. I appreciate the 
cooperation that allowed us to work out mutually agreeable text 
on numerous matters prior to your markup.
    Based on that cooperation and our associated 
understandings, the Foreign Affairs Committee will not seek a 
sequential referral or object to floor consideration of the 
bill text approved at your Committee markup. This decision in 
no way diminishes or alters the jurisdictional interests of the 
Foreign Affairs Committee in this bill, any subsequent 
amendments, or similar legislation. I request your support for 
the appointment of House Foreign Affairs conferees during any 
House-Senate conference on this legislation.
    Finally, I respectfully request that you include this 
letter and your response in your committee report on the bill 
and in the Congressional Record during consideration of H.R. 
1735 on the House floor.
            Sincerely,
                                           Edward R. Royce,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. Edward R. Royce,
Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
1735, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016. I agree that the Committee on Foreign Affairs has valid 
jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important 
legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to 
request a referral in the interest of expediting consideration 
of the bill. I agree that by foregoing a sequential referral, 
the Committee on Foreign Affairs is not waiving its 
jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters will be 
included in the committee report on the bill.
            Sincerely,
                             William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: In recognition of the importance of 
expediting the passage of H.R. 1735, the ``Fiscal Year 2016 
National Defense Authorization Act'', the House Permanent 
Select Committee on Intelligence hereby waives further 
consideration of the bill. The Committee has jurisdictional 
interests in H.R. 1735, including intelligence and 
intelligence-related authorizations and provisions in the 
amendment.
    The Committee takes this action only with the understanding 
that this procedural route should not be construed to prejudice 
the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence's 
jurisdictional interest over this bill or any similar bill and 
will not be considered precedent for consideration of matters 
of jurisdictional interest to the Committee in the future, 
including in connection with any subsequent consideration of 
the bill by the House. In addition, the Permanent Select 
Committee on Intelligence will seek conferees on any provisions 
in the bill that are within its jurisdiction during any House-
Senate conference that may be convened on this legislation.
    Finally, I would ask that you include a copy of our 
exchange of letters on this matter in the Congressional Record 
during the House debate on H.R. 1735. I appreciate the 
constructive work between our committees on this matter and 
thank you for your consideration.
            Sincerely,
                                               Devin Nunes,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                       Committee on Armed Services,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. Devin Nunes,
Chairman, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
1735, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016. I agree that the Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence has valid jurisdictional claims to certain 
provisions in this important legislation, and I am most 
appreciative of your decision not to request a referral in the 
interest of expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that 
by foregoing a sequential referral, the Permanent Select 
Committee on Intelligence is not waiving its jurisdiction. 
Further, this exchange of letters will be included in the 
committee report on the bill.
            Sincerely,
                             William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                                Committee on the Judiciary,
                                    Washington, DC, April 30, 2015.
Hon. William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Chairman Thornberry: I write to confirm our mutual 
understanding regarding H.R. 1735, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016. This legislation 
contains subject matter within the jurisdiction of the 
Committee on the Judiciary. However, in order to expedite floor 
consideration of this important legislation, the committee 
waives consideration of the bill.
    The Committee on the Judiciary takes this action only with 
the understanding that the committee's jurisdictional interests 
over this and similar legislation are in no way diminished or 
altered. The committee also reserves the right to seek 
appointment to any House-Senate conference on this legislation 
and requests your support if such a request is made.
    Finally, I would appreciate your including this letter in 
the Congressional Record during consideration of H.R. 1735 on 
the House Floor. Thank you for your attention to these matters.
            Sincerely,
                                             Bob Goodlatte,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. Bob Goodlatte,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
1735, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016. I agree that the Committee on the Judiciary has valid 
jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important 
legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to 
request a referral in the interest of expediting consideration 
of the bill. I agree that by foregoing a sequential referral, 
the Committee on the Judiciary is not waiving its jurisdiction. 
Further, this exchange of letters will be included in the 
committee report on the bill.
            Sincerely,
                             William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                            Committee on Natural Resources,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing concerning H.R. 1735, the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016. That 
bill, as ordered reported, contains provisions within the Rule 
X jurisdiction of the Natural Resources Committee, including 
those noted in addendum A.
    In the interest of permitting you to proceed expeditiously 
to floor consideration of this very important bill, I am 
willing to waive this committee's right to a sequential 
referral. I do so with the understanding that the Natural 
Resources Committee does not waive any future jurisdictional 
claim over the subject matter contained in the bill which fall 
within its Rule X jurisdiction. I also request that you urge 
the Speaker to name members of the Natural Resources committee 
to any conference committee to consider such provisions.
    Please place this letter into the committee report on H.R. 
1735 and into the Congressional Record during consideration of 
the measure on the House floor. Thank you for the cooperative 
spirit in which you and your staff have worked regarding this 
matter and others between our respective committees, and 
congratulations on this significant achievement.
            Sincerely,
                                                Rob Bishop,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. Rob Bishop,
Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
1735, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016. I agree that the Committee on Natural Resources has valid 
jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important 
legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to 
request a referral in the interest of expediting consideration 
of the bill. I agree that by foregoing a sequential referral, 
the Committee on Natural Resources is not waiving its 
jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters will be 
included in the committee report on the bill.
            Sincerely,
                             William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
              Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you concerning the 
jurisdictional interest of the Committee on Oversight and 
Government Reform in matters being considered in H.R. 1735, the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016.
    Our committee recognizes the importance of H.R. 1735 and 
the need for the legislation to move expeditiously. Therefore, 
while we have a valid claim to jurisdiction over the bill, I do 
not intend to request a sequential referral. This, of course, 
is conditional on our mutual understanding that nothing in this 
legislation or my decision to forego a sequential referral 
waives, reduces or otherwise affects the jurisdiction of the 
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and that a copy 
of this letter and your response acknowledging our 
jurisdictional interest will be included in the Committee 
Report and as part of the Congressional Record during 
consideration of this bill by the House.
    The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform also asks 
that you support our request to be conferees on the provisions 
over which we have jurisdiction during any House-Senate 
conference.
    Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
            Sincerely,
                                            Jason Chaffetz,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. Jason Chaffetz,
Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
1735, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016. I agree that the Committee on Oversight and Government 
Reform has valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in 
this important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your 
decision not to request a referral in the interest of 
expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing 
a sequential referral, the Committee on Oversight and 
Government Reform is not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, 
this exchange of letters will be included in the committee 
report on the bill.
            Sincerely,
                             William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Small Business,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Chairman Thornberry: I am writing to you concerning 
the bill H.R. 1735, the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2016. There are certain provisions in the 
legislation which fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee 
on Small Business pursuant to Rule X(q) of the House of 
Representatives.
    In the interest of permitting the Committee on Armed 
Services to proceed expeditiously to floor consideration of 
this important bill, I am willing to waive the right of the 
Committee on Small Business to sequential referral. I do so 
with the understanding that by waiving consideration of the 
bill, the Committee on Small Business does not waive any future 
jurisdictional claim over the subject matters contained in the 
bill which fall within its Rule X(q) jurisdiction, including 
future bills that the Committee on Armed Services will 
consider. I request that you urge the Speaker to appoint 
members of this Committee to any conference committee which is 
named to consider such provisions.
    Please place this letter into the committee report on H.R. 
1735 and into the Congressional Record during consideration of 
the measure on the House floor. Thank you for the cooperative 
spirit in which you have worked regarding this issue and others 
between our respective committees.
            Sincerely,
                                              Steve Chabot,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. Steve Chabot,
Chairman, Committee on Small Business,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
1735, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016. I agree that the Committee on Small Business has valid 
jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important 
legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to 
request a referral in the interest of expediting consideration 
of the bill. I agree that by foregoing a sequential referral, 
the Committee on Small Business is not waiving its 
jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters will be 
included in the committee report on the bill.
            Sincerely,
                             William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

        House of Representatives, Committee on Science, 
            Space, and Technology,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Thornberry: I write to confirm our mutual 
understanding regarding H.R. 1735, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016. This legislation 
contains subject matter within the jurisdiction of the 
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. However, in order 
to expedite floor consideration of this important legislation, 
the Committee waives consideration of the bill.
    The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology takes this 
action only with the understanding that the Committee's 
jurisdictional interests over this and similar legislation are 
in no way diminished or altered.
    The Committee also reserves the right to seek appointment 
to any House-Senate conference on this legislation and requests 
your support if such a request is made. Finally, I would 
appreciate your including this letter in the Congressional 
Record during consideration of H.R. 1735 on the House Floor. 
Thank you for your attention to these matters.
            Sincerely,
                                               Lamar Smith,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. Lamar Smith,
Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
1735, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016. I agree that the Committee on Science, Space, and 
Technology has valid jurisdictional claims to certain 
provisions in this important legislation, and I am most 
appreciative of your decision not to request a referral in the 
interest of expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that 
by foregoing a sequential referral, the Committee on Science, 
Space, and Technology is not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, 
this exchange of letters will be included in the committee 
report on the bill.
            Sincerely,
                             William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

        House of Representatives, Committee on 
            Transportation and Infrastructure,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Chairman Thornberry: I write concerning H.R. 1735, the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016, as 
amended. There are certain provisions in the legislation that 
fall within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure.
    However, in order to expedite this legislation for floor 
consideration, the Committee will forgo action on this bill. 
This, of course, is conditional on our mutual understanding 
that forgoing consideration of the bill does not prejudice the 
Committee with respect to the appointment of conferees or to 
any future jurisdictional claim over the subject matters 
contained in the bill or similar legislation that fall within 
the Committee's Rule X jurisdiction. I request you urge the 
Speaker to name members of the Committee to any conference 
committee named to consider such provisions.
    Please place a copy of this letter and your response 
acknowledging our jurisdictional interest into the committee 
report on H.R. 1735 and into the Congressional Record during 
consideration of the measure on the House floor.
            Sincerely,
                                              Bill Shuster,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. Bill Shuster,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
1735, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016. I agree that the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure has valid jurisdictional claims to certain 
provisions in this important legislation, and I am most 
appreciative of your decision not to request a referral in the 
interest of expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that 
by foregoing a sequential referral, the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure is not waiving its 
jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters will be 
included in the committee report on the bill.
            Sincerely,
                             William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                            Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
                                    Washington, DC, April 30, 2015.
Hon. William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Thornberry: I write to confirm our mutual 
understanding regarding several provisions contained in the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016. This 
legislation contains subject matter within the jurisdiction of 
House Committee on Veterans' Affairs. However, in order to 
expedite floor consideration of this important legislation, the 
committee waives consideration of the bill on the following 
provisions.
    Title 5, Section 562--Availability of Additional Training 
Opportunities under Transition Assistance Program
    Title 5, Section 565--Recognition of Additional Involuntary 
Mobilization Duty Authorities Exempt from Five-Year Limit on 
Reemployment Rights of Persons who Serve in the Uniformed 
Services
    Title 5, Section 566--Job Training and Post-Service 
Placement Executive Committee
    Title 5, Section 592--Honoring Certain Members of the 
Reserve Components as Veterans
    Title 5, Section 701--Joint Uniform Formulary for 
Transition of Care
    Title 7, Section 721--Extension of Authority for DOD-VA 
Health Care Sharing Incentive Fund
    Title 7, Section 722--Extension of Authority for Joint 
Department of Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs Medical 
Facility Demonstration Fund
    Title 12, Section 1251--Sense of Congress Recognizing the 
70th Anniversary of the End of Allied Military Engagement in 
the Pacific Theater
    Title 14, Section 1431--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
    The House Committee on Veterans' Affairs takes this action 
only with the understanding that the committee's jurisdictional 
interests over this and similar legislation are in no way 
diminished or altered.
    The committee also reserves the right to seek appointment 
to any House-Senate conference on this legislation and requests 
your support if such a request is made. Finally, I would 
appreciate your including this letter in the Congressional 
Record during consideration of H.R. 1735 on the House Floor. 
Thank you for your attention to these matters.
            Sincerely,
                                               Jeff Miller,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. Jeff Miller,
Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
1735, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016. I agree that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs has valid 
jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important 
legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to 
request a referral in the interest of expediting consideration 
of the bill. I agree that by foregoing a sequential referral, 
the Committee on Veterans' Affairs is not waiving its 
jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters will be 
included in the committee report on the bill.
            Sincerely,
                             William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Ways and Means,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Thornberry: I write to confirm our mutual 
understanding regarding H.R. 1735, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016. This legislation 
contains subject matter within the jurisdiction of the 
Committee on Ways and Means. However, in order to expedite 
floor consideration of this important legislation, the 
committee waives consideration of the bill.
    The Committee on Ways and Means takes this action only with 
the understanding that the committee's jurisdictional interests 
over this and similar legislation are in no way diminished or 
altered.
    The committee also reserves the right to seek appointment 
to any House-Senate conference on this legislation and requests 
your support if such a request is made. Finally, I would 
appreciate your including this letter in the Congressional 
Record during consideration of H.R. 1735 on the House Floor. 
Thank you for your attention to these matters.
            Sincerely,
                                                 Paul Ryan,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                       Washington, DC, May 1, 2015.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
1735, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016. I agree that the Committee on Ways and Means has a valid 
jurisdictional claim to a provision in this important 
legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to 
request a referral in the interest of expediting consideration 
of the bill. I agree that by foregoing a sequential referral, 
the Committee on Ways and Means is not waiving its 
jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters will be 
included in the committee report on the bill.
            Sincerely,
                             William M. ``Mac'' Thornberry,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                


                              FISCAL DATA

    Pursuant to clause 3(d) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the committee attempted to ascertain 
annual outlays resulting from the bill during fiscal year 2016 
and each of the following 5 fiscal years. The results of such 
efforts are reflected in the committee cost estimate, which is 
included in this report pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII 
of the Rules of the House of Representatives.

                  CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the House 
of Representatives, the cost estimate prepared by the 
Congressional Budget Office and submitted pursuant to section 
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 is as follows:

         CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE

                                                       May 4, 2015.
Hon. Mac Thornberry
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
completed a preliminary estimate of the direct spending effects 
of H.R. 1735, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2016, as ordered reported by the House Committee on Armed 
Services on April 30, 2015. This preliminary estimate is based 
on legislative language for H.R. 1735 that was provided to CBO 
on May 1, 2015. CBO's complete cost estimate for H.R. 1735, 
including discretionary costs, will be provided shortly.
    H.R. 1735 would make several major changes to the military 
retirement system beginning in 2018. One such change, requiring 
the Department of Defense to make matching contributions to the 
Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) on behalf of military personnel, 
would encourage service members to increase their contributions 
to the TSP, thereby reducing their taxable income. CBO and the 
staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation estimate that enacting 
this bill would reduce revenues by about $1.3 billion over the 
2018-2025 period (see attached table). Several other provisions 
would change direct spending by less than $500,000 over the 
2016-2025 period. Because the bill would affect revenues and 
direct spending, pay-as-you-go procedures apply.
    In the decade after 2025 and in subsequent decades, CBO 
expects that other changes to the military retirement system in 
the bill would reduce mandatory spending from the Military 
Retirement Trust Fund by more than the revenue losses from 
expanded participation in the TSP in those years.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is David Newman, 
who can be reached at 226-2840.
            Sincerely,
                                        Keith Hall,
                                                          Director.

                                     PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF THE IMPACT OF H.R. 1735 ON REVENUES AND DIRECT SPENDING
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             By fiscal year, in millions of dollars
                                       -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         2016   2017   2018     2019      2020      2021      2022      2023      2024      2025    2016-2020  2016-2025
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thrift Savings Plan Changes in              0      0     -51      -125      -154      -168      -183      -198      -214      -230       -330     -1,323
 Revenuesa............................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources:CBO and the Staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT).
Notes:Sections 631-634 would make several major changes to the military retirement system beginning in 2018. One such change, requiring the Department
  of Defense to make matching contributions to the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) on behalf of military personnel, would encourage service members to
  increase their contributions to the TSP, thereby reducing their taxable income. As a result, CBO and JCT expect that revenues would decline relative
  to current law. In the decade after 2025 and in subsequent decades, CBO expects that other changes to the military retirement system in sections 631-
  634 would reduce mandatory spending from the Military Retirement Trust Fund by more than the revenue losses from expanded participation in the TSP in
  those years.
Other provisions of H.R. 1735 would change direct spending by less than $500,000 over the 2016-2025 period.
aNegative numbers signify a reduction in revenues.

           STATEMENT REQUIRED BY THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET ACT

    Pursuant to clause (3)(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, and section 308(a) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344):
    (1) This legislation does not provide budget authority 
subject to an allocation made pursuant to section 302(b) of 
Public Law 93-344;
    (2) The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Estimate included 
in this report pursuant to clause (3)(c)(3) of rule XIII of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives contains CBO's projection 
of how this legislation will affect the levels of budget 
authority, budget outlays, revenues, and tax expenditures for 
fiscal year 2016 and for the ensuring 5 fiscal years; and
    (3) The CBO Estimate does not identify any new budget 
authority for assistance to state and local governments by this 
measure at the time that this report was filed.

                        COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE

    Pursuant to clause (3)(d)(2)(B) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Congressional Budget 
Office Estimate included in this report satisfies the 
requirement for the committee to include an estimate by the 
committee of the costs incurred in carrying out this bill.

                          ADVISORY OF EARMARKS

    The committee finds that H.R. 1735, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016, as reported, does not 
contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or 
limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9 of rule XXI of 
the Rules of the House of Representatives.

                           OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

    With respect to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, this legislation results from 
hearings and other oversight activities conducted by the 
committee pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and are 
reflected in the body of this report.

                GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    With respect to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, the general goal and objective of 
H.R. 1735 is to meet the national security needs of a nation at 
war, while preparing our warfighters for the threats of 
tomorrow, wherever and whenever they might emerge. This 
legislation would meet that goal while taking initial steps to 
reform the Department of Defense and balance the 
responsibilities of fiscal stewardship incumbent upon Congress 
in a time of economic stress. Only by providing for the common 
defense in an efficient, fiscally responsible manner can the 
Nation address our national security challenges.
    The bill would sustain equipment and weapon systems vital 
to the success of our service men and women, while taking steps 
to provide them more efficiently. The committee took steps to 
initiate reforms within the acquisition system, military 
compensation and benefits, and the organizational overhead of 
the Department of Defense. The committee's intent is not only 
to procure services and equipment more cost-effectively, but 
also to increase the flexibility of the institution to address 
emerging threats and to put the military on a sustainable 
fiscal footing while ensuring the military services can recruit 
and retain a highly qualified, all-volunteer force.
    The reforms to the defense acquisition system were 
previewed earlier this year as H.R. 1597, the Agile Acquisition 
to Retain Technological Edge Act, sponsored by Chairman 
Thornberry and Ranking Member Smith. The measures would 
streamline the acquisition process, advancing critical 
decisions to the initial stages of the acquisition process, 
reducing the number of required legal certifications while 
maintaining needed accountability, and empowering program 
managers and other Department of Defense decision makers to 
make judgments in the best interests of our troops and the 
taxpayer. The bill would make changes to the acquisition 
strategy required for major defense programs, including the 
consolidation of at least six separate reporting requirements 
into a single, living document. Furthermore, these reforms 
would empower the workforce by removing obstacles that make it 
difficult for military personnel to serve in acquisition roles; 
make the Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund 
permanent; require training on the commercial market, including 
on commercial market research, to expand access to this 
valuable sector; and expand ethics training for the acquisition 
workforce. The bill would also simplify the chain of command 
for acquisition decisions, reforming a process currently mired 
in layers of bureaucracy.
    The committee recognizes that an agile military depends on 
recruiting and retaining the best talent. This means the 
military must compete with the private sector, high-tech firms, 
and industry, to bring in or to hold onto top talent. To 
compete effectively, the Department of Defense must offer 
benefits on par with or better than the private marketplace. 
The committee is grateful to the Military Compensation and 
Retirement Modernization Commission for its work in 
recommending needed reforms. The committee believes that after 
years of study, it is appropriate to take the initial steps to 
modernize the military's retirement system. However, the 
committee is acutely aware of the potential for unintended 
consequences and the need to give the Department time to do its 
own assessment of these important recommendations.
    An agile military also efficiently manages the workforce 
and keeps the size of headquarters in balance with the force in 
the field. The committee supports efforts by the Department to 
reduce headquarters budgets and personnel, if those reductions 
are taken in a strategic manner, preserving critical 
competencies, such as organic maintenance and the acquisition 
workforce. However, it is not clear if these efforts are 
resulting in efficiencies, since the Department lacks a 
baseline from which to measure reductions against, as noted by 
the Government Accountability Office. Therefore, the committee 
would mandate the implementation of certain reductions to 
headquarters budgets and personnel and require a baseline from 
which to hold the Department accountable.
    The committee also shares the concerns expressed by the 
Secretary of Defense and other current and former senior 
defense officials that they need additional tools and 
flexibility to shape the workforce and to retain the best and 
brightest, particularly under the current budgetary 
environment. The legislation would express a sense of Congress 
on the need for a performance management system to assist 
managers in managing the workforce. Elsewhere in this report, 
the committee requires the Secretary to brief the committee on 
additional authorities required to shape and manage the total 
workforce.
    The committee is aware that Congress can often be the 
source of inefficiency in the Department of Defense. To free up 
vital manpower, the legislation would take a number of actions 
that eliminate over 460 congressionally mandated reports over 
the next 6 years that provide little value to the military or 
Congress.
    Finally, while the committee supports national defense 
funding consistent with the President's request, it also cuts 
excessive or wasteful expenditures and dedicates those 
resources to more urgent needs. For example, the committee 
freed resources from within the Foreign Currency Fluctuation, 
Defense (FCF,D) Account and the reserve account for fuel. In 
the committee report accompanying the Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (H. 
Rept. 113-446), the committee encouraged the Department to 
consider the current foreign currency balance when determining 
future currency levels. The fund has been at its statutory 
limit of $970.0 million since 2012. The current budget request 
failed to change how foreign currency rates are calculated. 
Moreover, the Department continues to rely on rates calculated 
in 2009 for fuel, rather than estimated market prices for the 
upcoming fiscal year. The committee would re-direct these and 
other funds to higher priority programs.

                     STATEMENT OF FEDERAL MANDATES

    Pursuant to section 423 of Public Law 104-4, this 
legislation contains no Federal mandates with respect to state, 
local, and tribal governments, nor with respect to the private 
sector. Similarly, the bill provides no Federal 
intergovernmental mandates.

                  FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

    Consistent with the requirements of section 5(b) of the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act, the committee finds that the 
functions of the proposed advisory committee authorized in the 
bill are not currently being nor could they be performed by one 
or more agencies, an advisory committee already in existence or 
by enlarging the mandate of an existing advisory committee.

                APPLICABILITY TO THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    The committee finds that this legislation does not relate 
to the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 
104-1).

                    DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS

    No provision of H.R. 1735 establishes or reauthorizes a 
program of the Federal Government known to be duplicative of 
another Federal program, a program that was included in any 
report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress 
pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program 
related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of 
Federal Domestic Assistance.

                  DISCLOSURE OF DIRECTED RULE MAKINGS

    The committee estimates that H.R. 1735 requires no directed 
rule makings.

                            COMMITTEE VOTES

    In accordance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, record votes were taken with 
respect to the committee's consideration of H.R. 1735. The 
record of these votes is contained in the following pages.
    The committee ordered H.R. 1735 to be reported to the House 
with a favorable recommendation by a vote of 60-2, a quorum 
being present.

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                          roll call vote no. 1


                               h.r. 1735

    On Courtney Log 042
    Description: Strikes section 1023, a provision that reduces 
the term of a cruiser maintenance availability, that was 
included in the Seapower and Projection Forces subcommittee 
mark.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  24        38        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                          roll call vote no. 2


                               h.r. 1735

    On Bishop Log 089
    Description: Provision would permanently extend the land 
withdrawals for certain military reservations.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Smith.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Brady.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Miller....................  x         ........  ..........  Mrs. Davis......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Langevin....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Larsen......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Courtney....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Franks....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Speier......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Castro......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Peters......  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Veasey......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Heck......................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Norcross....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Takai.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Graham......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Cook......................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  36        27        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                          roll call vote no. 3


                               h.r. 1735

    On Wilson Log 092
    Description: Amend existing law to allow an agency to 
object to the inclusion of certain property on the National 
Register or its designation as a National Historic Landmark for 
reasons of national security.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Smith.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Brady.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Miller....................  x         ........  ..........  Mrs. Davis......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Langevin....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Larsen......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Cooper......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  ........  ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Courtney....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Franks....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Speier......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Castro......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Peters......  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Veasey......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Heck......................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Norcross....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Takai.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Graham......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Cook......................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  35        27        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                          roll call vote no. 4


                               h.r. 1735

    On Tsongas Log 006
    Description: Strikes the provision regarding the greater 
sage grouse in Section 2862.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  ........  ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  26        36        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                          roll call vote no. 5


                               h.r. 1735

    On Rogers 061
    Description: Would allow the Army to transfer excess .45 
caliber M1911A1 pistols to the Corporation for the Promotion of 
Rifle Practice and Firearms Safety, also known as the Civilian 
Marksmanship Program (CMP).
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Smith.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Brady.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Miller....................  x         ........  ..........  Mrs. Davis......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Langevin....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Larsen......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Courtney....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Franks....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Speier......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Castro......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Peters......  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Heck......................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Norcross....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Takai.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  42        21        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                          roll call vote no. 6


                               h.r. 1735

    On Conaway Log 293
    Description: Only allows the Secretary of Defense to enter 
into a contract to plan, design, refurbish, or construct a 
biofuels facility if authorized by law to do so.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Smith.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Brady.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Miller....................  x         ........  ..........  Mrs. Davis......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Langevin....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Larsen......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Cooper......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Turner....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Courtney....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Franks....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Speier......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Castro......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Peters......  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Veasey......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Heck......................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Norcross....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Takai.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Graham......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Cook......................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  32        31        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                          roll call vote no. 7


                               h.r. 1735

    On Gibson Log 257
    Description: Add a sense of congress thanking the 
commission for their work and requesting time for members to 
engage servicemembers and families about retirement and 
healthcare reform. Require an assessment and report from the 
DoD on retirement and healthcare reform.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Larsen......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  8         55        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                          roll call vote no. 8


                               h.r. 1735

    On Gallego Log 280
    Description: Sense of Congress that the Secretary of 
Defense should consider allowing Deferred Action for Childhood 
Arrivals (DACA)-eligible individuals to serve in the military.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  33        30        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                          roll call vote no. 9


                               h.r. 1735

    On Veasey Log 021r1
    Description: Evaluation of whether allowing those who are 
considered Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals could 
expanded pool of potential recruits, and estimation of how 
making eligible for enlistment of DACA applicants would impact 
military readiness.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  34        29        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 10


                               h.r. 1735

    On Speier Log 157r1
    Description: Requires prosecution of military training 
instructors accused of sexual contact with trainees during 
basic training.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Larsen......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  14        49        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 11


                               h.r. 1735

    On Speier Log 201
    Description: Directs that all prosecutorial decisions for 
sexual assault cases be made by the Office of the Chief 
Prosecutor, independent of the defendant's or victim's chain of 
command.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Larsen......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  23        40        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 12


                               h.r. 1735

    On Franks Log 207r1
    Description: This amendment would task MDA to commence 
initial concept development for a space-based missile defense 
intercept and defeat layer.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Smith.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Brady.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Miller....................  x         ........  ..........  Mrs. Davis......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Langevin....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Larsen......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Cooper......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Turner....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Courtney....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Franks....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Speier......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Castro......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Peters......  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Veasey......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Walz........  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Heck......................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Norcross....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Takai.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  35        27        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 13


                               h.r. 1735

    On Cooper Log 51r1
    Description: Strikes section 3117, the prohibition on 
funding fixed portal monitors.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  27        35        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 14


                               h.r. 1735

    On Sanchez Log 164
    Description: Requires an independent study on extended 
nuclear deterrence and assurance.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  26        36        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 15


                               h.r. 1735

    On Sanchez Log 241r1
    Description: Authorize DoD funding transfer for non-
proliferation.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  ........  ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  26        35        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 16


                               h.r. 1735

    On Sanchez Log 311r3
    Description: Increases funding for Army O&M, Base 
Operations Support by $237.7 million and increases funding for 
several computing and ignition efforts at NNSA by $23.0 
million; with offset from NNSA Weapons Activities.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  22        40        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 17


                               h.r. 1735

    On Sanchez 168r1
    Description: Cost-sharing arrangements with NATO for the 
deployment of forward-based nuclear weapons in states of NATO.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  27        36        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 18


                               h.r. 1735

    On Cooper Log 289
    Description: Cuts $125M from MOX and adds $125M to 
Infrastructure and Safety related to Recapitalization.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  23        40        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 19


                               h.r. 1735

    On Moulton Log 211r1
    Description: Substitute Amendment to Log 274 - Would allow 
the Air Force to partially retire the A-10 aircraft in FY16 
(164 out of 283 a/c). As a result, this amendment makes 
available $682.7 million for unfunded requirements of the 
military services for counter-IED technology, MQ-9 Reapers, F-
16 upgrades, etc.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  26        37        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 20


                               h.r. 1735

    On Speier Log 246r1
    Description: Prohibits tax inverted companies from 
operating on military installations.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  ........  ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  ........  ..........  Mr. Takai.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  13        48        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 21


                               h.r. 1735

    On Takai Log 180r1
    Description: Amends section 904 of the FY14 NDAA, as 
further amended by section 905 of the Full Committee Mark, to 
require the DOD to implement its own goal of reducing DOD 
management headquarters budgets and personnel by 20 percent for 
certain organizations in the National Capital Region.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  ........  ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  x         ........  ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Franks....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  ........  ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  45        16        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 22


                               h.r. 1735

    On Bordallo Log 183r2
    Description: Amendment would strike section 906 and replace 
with Sense of Congress language highlighting existing federal 
law that requires the DOD to develop and implement a workforce 
performance management system.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  ........  ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  x         ........  ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  43        19        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 23


                               h.r. 1735

    On Duckworth Log 143
    Description: Strike section 594, which requires Department 
of Defense report on rulemaking under the Military Lending Act 
and delays implementing new lending rules under the Act pending 
submission of such report.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  ........  ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  32        30        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 24


                               h.r. 1735

    On Fleming Log 269r1
    Description: Prevents further reductions in Army end 
strength until 180 days after SecDef certification report 
provided to Congress.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  ........  ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Larsen......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Cooper......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Castro......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Veasey......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Walz........  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  12        50        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 25


                               h.r. 1735

    On Johnson Log 230
    Description: This amendment prohibits the transfer, through 
the 1033 program, of MRAP's and M16's.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  ........  ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  ........  x         ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  20        42        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 26


                               h.r. 1735

    On Johnson Log 229
    Description: This amendment repeals a requirement that law 
enforcement use militarized equipment within one year of 
receipt.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  ........  ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  ........  x         ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  24        38        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 27


                               h.r. 1735

    On Johnson Log 228
    Description: This amendment requires a report to Congress 
certifying that all militarized equipment transferred through 
the 1033 program can be accounted for.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  ........  ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  ........  x         ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Courtney....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Franks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  ........  x         ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  ........  x         ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  27        35        0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      committee on armed services


                             114th Congress


                         roll call vote no. 28


                               h.r. 1735

    On Final Passage
    Description: On motion by Mr. Forbes to report the bill 
H.R. 1735 as amended, favorably to the House, with a 
recommendation that it do pass.
    Apr 29, 2015.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Member                 Aye       No       Present        Member          Aye       No       Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thornberry................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Smith.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................  ........  ........  ..........  Ms. Sanchez.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Forbes....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Brady.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Miller....................  x         ........  ..........  Mrs. Davis......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wilson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Langevin....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. LoBiondo..................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Larsen......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bishop....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Cooper......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Turner....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Bordallo....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Kline.....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Courtney....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Rogers....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Tsongas.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Franks....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Garamendi...  ........  x         ..........
Mr. Shuster...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Johnson.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Conaway...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Speier......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Lamborn...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Castro......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Wittman...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Duckworth...  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Hunter....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Peters......  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Fleming...................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Veasey......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Coffman...................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Gabbard.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Gibson....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Walz........  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Hartzler.................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. O'Rourke....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Heck......................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Norcross....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Scott.....................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Gallego.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Brooks....................  ........  x         ..........  Mr. Takai.......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Nugent....................  x         ........  ..........  Ms. Graham......  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Cook......................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Ashford.....  x         ........  ..........
Mr. Bridenstine...............  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Moulton.....  x         ........  ..........
Dr. Wenstrup..................  x         ........  ..........  Mr. Aguilar.....  x         ........  ..........
Mrs. Walorski.................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Byrne.....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Graves....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Zinke.....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. Stefanik..................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Ms. McSally...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Knight....................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. MacArthur.................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
Mr. Russell...................  x         ........  ..........                    ........  ........  ..........
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roll Call Vote Total:.........  60        2         0                             ........  ........  ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

         CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

    The committee has taken steps to make available the 
analysis of changes in existing law made by the bill, as 
required by clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 
of Representatives, and will make the analysis available as 
soon as possible.

CONGRESSMAN JOHN GARAMENDI'S DISSENTING VIEWS FOR H.R. 1735, THE FISCAL 
              YEAR 2016 NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT

    The committee has worked long and hard on the passage of 
the 54th National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016. The NDAA is usually a time when my colleagues on the 
House Armed Services Committee work together to prepare a 
committee mark that provides for a smart and strong defense. 
Instead, the committee refused to make many of the hard choices 
necessary to keep our military ready and responsive. The 
committee's reckless refusal to accept my amendments, which 
would have provided the basic information we need to make smart 
decisions about our nuclear enterprise, prevented me from 
supporting this bill.
    I would like to note that there are some areas of the bill 
that I support. I commend the committee's continued recognition 
of the important role that both the RQ-4 Global Hawk and the U-
2 Dragon Lady play in our fulfilling our nation's intelligence, 
surveillance, and reconnaissance requirements. In addition, I 
appreciate the committee's acknowledgement that the Air Force's 
long-range air refueling recapitalization plans must not cause 
any gaps in our nation's robust air refueling capabilities. 
Finally, I'm pleased that the committee supports efforts to 
create a terrestrial-based backup to the Global Positioning 
System. GPS is a critical national asset, but it is potentially 
vulnerable to attack and efforts to create backup systems 
should receive the strongest backing.
    Unfortunately, the committee refused to agree to even the 
most basic requests for information like the justification for 
expanding our plutonium pit capacity or maintaining a nuclear 
triad. Nor did the committee agree to a modest cut to the MOX 
Fuel Fabrication Facility, which is significantly over budget 
and far behind schedule. Maintaining and modernizing our 
nuclear arsenal is expected to cost over $1 trillion over the 
next 25-30 years. It's becoming increasingly clear that we may 
not be able to afford this. We will have to make hard choices, 
but we run the risk of making the wrong choices if we do not 
have a clear picture of what the future looks like. Yet the 
committee has decided to continue spending billions of dollars 
on nuclear weapons programs that are fueling a new nuclear arms 
race with a willful ignorance.
    Some may point out that we cannot be in a nuclear arms race 
because treaties like New START have reduced the number of 
warheads in our inventory. The number of warheads may be going 
down, but the weapons that remain are becoming more lethal, 
more precise, and harder to detect. We may not have as many 
active warheads as we used to, but the net effect is the same. 
We are spending increasingly large sums of money to upgrade our 
nuclear arsenal. China, Russia, France, and the United Kingdom 
are doing the same in response. We on the committee are the 
ones that must make decisions about our trillion dollar nuclear 
enterprise. Shouldn't we want to get as much useful information 
as we can? Or are we going to just stick our heads in the sand 
and hope that everything works out?
    Beyond the nuclear issues, I am also deeply concerned about 
the committee's use of the Overseas Contingency Operations 
account to get around the Budget Control Act's discretionary 
spending caps. While we all agree that sequestration harms the 
readiness of our military and should be repealed, we should not 
be using the emergency war spending account to fund long-term 
national security priorities that are not war-related. Using 
OCO in this manner does not give our military the certainty it 
needs, making multi-year planning difficult and hampering its 
ability to effectively carry out critical missions and 
programs. It is irresponsible and does not help us improve our 
national security.
    I hope we can find ways to address these concerns through 
the floor amendment and conference processes so that we can 
shape the current draft legislation into a bill that is 
consistent with American values and that does not embroil us in 
yet another costly nuclear arms race. At the same time, this 
legislation provides the strongest support to all of our 
defense personnel--both civilian and military. As the 
representative for servicemembers at Travis Air Force Base, in 
Fairfield, California, which carries out a critical Air 
Mobility mission, and Beale Air Force Base near Marysville, 
which conducts a vital Intelligence, Surveillance, and 
Reconnaissance mission, I will continue to advocate for 
investing in the technologies and military capabilities that 
are effective against 21st century threats.
                                            John Garamendi.

                                  [all]